Patna High Court

Md. AfsarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

The second anticipatory bail application is frivolous and cannot be entertained, therefore it is rejected.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Afsar, sought anticipatory bail under section 309(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in connection with FIR No.456 of 2024. An earlier anticipatory bail application had been rejected on 8‑Oct‑2025, with the petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks. The petitioner renewed his prayer, relying on an affidavit filed on 18‑Nov‑2025 by a witness who claimed his earlier statement to police was obtained under force. The court held that a post‑rejection affidavit cannot revive a bail application and that the fresh petition was frivolous. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed, a cost of Rs.1,000 was imposed, and the petitioner was ordered to surrender within four weeks.

Issues considered

Whether a second anticipatory bail application can be entertained after an earlier application was rejected and a witness affidavit was filed thereafter

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(3)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Section 309
frivolous application
surrender

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11235 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-456 Year-2024 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Afsar Son of Md. Asraf R/o Mohalla - Mirishikar Toli Near Juma Masjid
                 Shershah Road, Dhanuki, Alamganj, P.O. - Gulzarbagh, P.S. - Alamganj,
                 District- Patna.
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Sandip Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Nirmala Kumari, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   25-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for

                   anticipatory bail in connection with Pakaribaraw P.S. Case no.

                   456 of 2024 registered under section 309(3) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. At the outset it may be mentioned here that the

                   earlier application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner in

                   connection with the instant F.I.R. was rejected vide order dated

                   8.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. no.41098 of 2025. While rejecting

                   the application for bail, the petitioner was directed to surrender

                   in the learned Court below with a period of four weeks i.e. on or

                   before 5.11.2025.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11235 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
                                            2/3




          that the bail was rejected taking into consideration the statement

          made by one Md. Tabish Khan before police who identified the

          vehicle used in the offence and of which the petitioner was the

          registered owner. Learned counsel submits that the said Md.

          Tabish Khan has sworn an affidavit, a copy of which has been

          brought on record as Annexure-P/5 to the instant application

          stating therein that he never made such statement before the

          police rather the police authority forcibly took his signature.

          This affidavit is dated 18.11.2025, subsequent to the rejection of

          bail of the petitioner on 8.10.2025.

                       5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by

          learned A.P.P. for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          having perused the contents of the petition, it transpires that the

          earlier application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was

          rejected vide order dated 8.10.2025 (Annexure-P/1) taking into

          consideration the material that had transpired in course of

          investigation. Affidavit sworn by one of the witnesses

          subsequently cannot be a ground for renewal of prayer for

          anticipatory bail. In the opinion of the Court, the instant

          application filed for a second anticipatory bail is frivolous and

          fit to be rejected.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11235 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                                   7. The application is accordingly rejected with a cost

                      of Rs. 1000/-, which shall be deposited in the Patna High Court

                      Legal Services Committee within a period of three months.

                                   8. The petitioner will surrender in the learned Court

                      below within a period of four weeks.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…