Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mahabub Khan @ PathanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that bail must be granted as the sole material against the petitioner is the co‑accused’s statement and he has been detained for over three months.

Summary

Mahabub Khan petitioned for regular bail in a case registered under sections 111 and 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner had contracted a murder and that a co‑accused, after being caught, implicated him. No incriminating article was recovered from the petitioner and the only evidence against him was the co‑accused’s statement. The petitioner had been in custody since 18‑11‑2025 and a charge‑sheet had already been filed. The Court, noting the lack of direct material, the reliance on a co‑accused’s statement, and the petitioner’s prolonged detention, ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted when the only evidence against the accused is a co‑accused’s statement.
  • Whether prolonged pre‑trial detention and the filing of a charge‑sheet justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • co‑accused statement
  • prolonged custody
  • Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • criminal procedure
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14092 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-580 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Mahabub Khan @ Pathan S/o Abdul Mahabub Khan Resident of Village-
                 Ijara Nawada, P.S- Sangrampur, Distt- East Champaran
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dewanand Tiwari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-03-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                   2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Banjaria P.S.Case

                   no.580 of 2025 registered under sections 111 and 61(2) of the

                   Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35

                   of the Arms Act.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that seeing the police personnel, the accused persons made an

                   attempt to escape. Three of them were caught, however, one

                   managed to escape. It is further stated that on search, various

                   incriminating articles including a loaded country made pistol

                   were recovered from their possession and on detailed inquiry,

                   they disclosed that the petitioner had given them a contract of

                   Rs. 3 lakhs to commit the murder of one Vijay Yadav and his

                   partner
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14092 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                      2/2




                                 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

                    that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No

                    incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner's

                    possession. The only material against him is the statement of the

                    coaccused made before the police. The petitioner is in custody

                    since 18.11.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted in the

                    case.

                                    5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                    taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the

                    F.I.R., the material that has transpired in course of investigation as is

                    evident from the order of the learned trial Court, the only material

                    against the petitioner being the statement of a coaccused made before

                    police, the petitioner having remained in custody for over 3 months

                    since 18.11.2025 and charge sheet having been submitted in the case,

                    the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection

                    with Banjaria P.S.Case no.580 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

                    Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like

                    amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st

                    Class, East Champaran at Motihari.

Bibhash                                                          (Partha Sarthy, J)
U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.