Patna High Court
Md. Nasim @Md. Nasim NadafversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to prescribed bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, comprising Md. Nasim and three women relatives, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (B.N.S.) alleging assault, robbery and other offences. They contended they have clean antecedents, were falsely implicated by the informant, and that the dispute had been settled by a Panchayat before the FIR was filed. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the allegations. The court examined the submissions, noting the lack of a clear motive in the FIR and the petitioners' claim of false implication. It granted anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., to be complied with if arrested within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the allegations under the B.N.S.
- Whether the petitioners were falsely implicated and the FIR lacks a proper basis for prosecution
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 109, 115(2), 118, 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 74
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- FIR
- Panchayat settlement
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15142 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2025 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Md. Nasim @Md. Nasim Nadaf Son of Md. Guljar Resident of Village
Chausima ward no-6, P.S-Musrigharari, District-Samastipur.
2. Israt Khatun Wife of Md. Sabir @ Md. Sabir Nadaf Resident of Village
Chausima ward no-6, P.S-Musrigharari, District-Samastipur.
3. Soni Praveen @ Soni Khatun @ Soni Khatoon. Wife of Md. Nasim @ Md.
Nasim Nadaf Resident of Village -Chausima ward no-6, P.S-Musrigharari,
District- Samastipur.
4. Najra Katun Wfie of Md. A Mosim@ Md. Mosim Nadaf Resident of Village
Chausima ward no-6, P.S-Musrigharari, District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. (Ms.) Indiwar Kumari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118, 109, 191(2), 190, 74, 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of the
BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioners no.
2, 3 and 4 are women and the informant alleges that accused
persons came and Md. Mosim assaulted him by rod causing
injury on head and petitioner no. 1 assaulted the daughter of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15142 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
2/3
informant by butt of pistol causing injury on head, while
Masum assaulted his son by lathi causing injury on head
thereafter petitioner no. 1 along with Nasim assaulted his wife
and Najra along with Soni also assaulted his wife and snatched
her earrings and accused vandalized household articles and took
Rs.1,50,000/- from the box.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no reason
for the occurrence has been assigned. It is next submitted that
the dispute was resolved by a Panchayati but the informant
thereafter for reasons best known instituted the instant case. It is
also submitted that the injury suffered by the injured has been
opined to be simple and the female members have been
implicated only to coerce the male members into submission.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners, above-named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15142 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
3/3
bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in
connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 169 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…