Patna High Court
Md. Akil @ Aakil AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 due to specific accusations and grievous injuries, but granted anticipatory bail to Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 considering the FIR delay, case‑countercase, and clean antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, three residents of Dhangawa village, sought anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR alleging that they assaulted an informant and his family on 30 June 2025. They argued innocence, citing a petty dispute, injuries being minor, a four‑day delay in filing the FIR, and clean antecedents. The State and the informant opposed the bail, emphasizing specific accusations and, for one petitioner, grievous injuries. The court rejected anticipatory bail for Petitioner No. 1 due to the direct nature of the accusation and serious injuries, but granted bail to Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3, taking into account the FIR delay, case‑countercase dynamics, and their clean records. The bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties each, under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and the application was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in view of the nature of the accusations and injuries
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the petitioners' clean antecedents justify granting anticipatory bail to Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3
- Whether the specific and direct accusation and grievous injuries warrant denial of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- FIR delay
- injury
- section 482
- Bihar
- Criminal Miscellaneous
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1629 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2025 Thana- PALASI District- Araria
======================================================
1. Md. Akil @ Aakil Alam Son of Md. Rakib @ Rakib Alam Resident of
village - Dhangawa, Ward No.- 01, P.S.- Palasi, District - Araria.
2. Md. Rakib @ Rakib Alam Son of Soukat Ali Resident of village -
Dhangawa, Ward No.- 01, P.S.- Palasi, District - Araria.
3. Md. Arshad @ Arshad Hussain Son of Md. Khalid @ Khalid Resident of
village - Dhangawa, Ward No.- 01, P.S.- Palasi, District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Md. Dilshad Alam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
For the Informant : Md. Naushaduzzoha, Advocate
Mr. Somesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on
30.06.2025, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including
these petitioners, abused and assaulted informant and his family
members.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1629 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. On account of petty dispute, maar-
peet took place in which both sides sustained injuries. There is
case and counter-case. Moreover, the present F.I.R. has been
lodged after inordinate delay of four days and there is no
plausible explanation for the same which itself makes the entire
prosecution case doubtful. Doctor has found the injuries,
allegedly caused by Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, simple in nature.
Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and
submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. with specific
accusation that they, along with other F.I.R. named accused
persons, abused and assaulted informant and his family
members. Injuries caused by Petitioner No. 1 are grievous in
nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and nature of
injuries sustained by the injured, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 is rejected.
7. So far as Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1629 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
injuries allegedly caused by these petitioners, case and counter-
case, delay in lodging of the F.I.R. and clean antecedents of the
petitioners, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner
Nos. 2 and 3 is allowed.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Araria
in connection with Palasi P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025, subject to
condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application
stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…