Patna High Court
Adil Haider @ BaibhavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail is denied where a specific accusation is made against the accused, but may be granted where only omnibus allegations exist.
Summary
The petitioners, accused in PS case No. 491 of 2025 for offences under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest. The FIR alleged that a gang of 20‑25 persons, including the petitioners, assaulted an informant with iron rods and stones, causing grievous injuries. The petitioners argued that the allegations against most of them were omnibus and lacked specific evidence, especially medical corroboration, while only Samad Imam faced a direct accusation. The State, invoking Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code, contended that anticipatory bail was not maintainable once a process under that section was issued. The Court, relying on Supreme Court precedent that a proclaimed offender status does not bar anticipatory bail, examined the specificity of the charges and rejected bail for Samad Imam, who was directly implicated. The Court granted bail to the remaining petitioners, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNS and a four‑week surrender period. The order thus differentiated between specific and omnibus allegations in granting bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail is maintainable when a process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued
- Whether an omnibus allegation without specific participation warrants anticipatory bail
- Whether the presence of a specific accusation against an accused precludes anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 192(3), 303(2), 351(3), 352, 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 82
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- omnibus allegation
- specific accusation
- Section 82 Cr.P.C.
- Section 482(2) BNS
- proclaimed offender
- drug trafficking
- assault
- grievous injury
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17149 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2025 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Adil Haider @ Baibhav S/o Late Iftkhar Haider R/o Village - Herthu, P.S -
Islampur, District - Nalanda
2. Aquib Haider S/oLate Iftkhar Haider R/o Village - Herthu, P.S - Islampur,
District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18171 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2025 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Samad Imam S/O Asgar Imam R/O Village- Herthu, P.S- Islampur, Distt.-
Nalanda.
2. Afsar Imam @ Asfar Imam S/O Asgar Imam R/O Village- Herthu, P.S-
Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda.
3. Afzal Imam @ Saijan S/O Asgar Imam R/O Village- Herthu, P.S- Islampur,
Distt.- Nalanda.
4. Farhan Alam @ Abdul Farhan S/O Abdul Khalik @ Raju R/O Village-
Herthu, P.S- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17149 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar Sinha 2, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Sonu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M. K. Nirala, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18171 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Sonu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17149 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
2/6
ORAL ORDER
5 24-06-2026 Learned Advocates for the respective parties are
present.
2. With the consent of the learned Advocates, both the
applications arising out of same P.S. case, have been heard
together and are being disposed off by this common order.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioners in Cr. Misc.
No. 18171 of 2026 seeks permission to make necessary
correction in the cause title of the petitioner no. 3.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 491 of 2025, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 192(3),
126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 351(3), 352 of the BNS.
6. Based upon the fardbeyan, the prosecution alleges
that a gang of 20-25 people, who were indulge in the business
of illegal trade of ganja and smack in the localities, they used to
give threatening to the villagers that those who will come in the
way, they will have to face serious consequences. On
13.09.2025, while the informant was returning to his home, in
the meanwhile, all the FIR named accused persons, including
the petitioners, surrounded him and on the exhortation made by
co-accused Asghar Imam, all of them started assaulting brutally.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17149 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
3/6
It is specifically alleged that co-accused Farhan Alam assaulted
him over his eye by means of stone and jumped over his chest;
whereas co-accused Samad Imam and Abdullah Khaliq @ Raju,
who were carrying iron rods in their hands brutally assaulted
over his head due to which he sustained serious injury. There is
further allegation of snatching of valuables.
7. Learned Advocate for the petitioners taking this
Court through the FIR primarily contended that the specific
accusation has been levelled against co-accused Samad Imam
and Abdullah Khaliq @ Raju and so far the others are
concerned, there is omnibus nature of allegation. Even if the
allegation against Farhan Alam of causing assault by means of
stone is concerned, the same has not been corroborated with the
medical report. It is further contended that on account of
previous enmity, a scuffle took place which resulted into some
unfortunate injuries. Moreover, the allegation that the petitioners
were members of the gang, who were indulged in the trade of
illicit liquor/drugs, does not inspire confidence as at no point of
time any FIR/complaint has been lodged against them with
respect to any such incident. It is lastly contended that so far
petitioner no. 2 in Cr. Misc. No. 17149 of 2026 is concerned, he
bears fair antecedent, whereas petitioner no. 1 bears two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17149 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
4/6
criminal antecedent. So far petitioners of Cr. Misc. No. 18171 of
2026 are concerned, petitioner no. 1 bears two criminal
antecedent as has been disclosed in supplementary affidavit,
whereas petitioner no. 2 bears one criminal antecedent and
petitioner nos. 3 and 4 have clean antecedent.
8. On the other hand, learned Advocates for the State
and the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Mr.
Sonu Kumar, learned Advocate for the informant while
opposing the prayer for bail submitted that since the petitioners
were absconding from their arrest, in the meanwhile, process
under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued. Once the
process has been issued, no anticipatory bail is maintainable is
the contention of the learned Advocate. It is further contended
that there is specific accusation against the petitioners of
participating in the crime and moreover co-accused Samad
Imam is the person who assaulted over the head of the
informant which resulted into grievous injury. The accused
persons also bear criminal antecedent as has been disclosed in
their respective bail applications/supplementary affidavit.
9. Before proceeding further it would be pertinent to
state here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that an accused
being declared a proclaimed offender does not create an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17149 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
5/6
absolute bar against seeking anticipatory bail. The Court must
assess the nature of the offence and the surrounding
circumstances. [Asha Dubey Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh:
2024 SCC OnLine SC 5633]
10. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note
of the specific accusation led by the informant that it is Samad
Imam and co-accused Abdullah Khaliq @ Raju, who have
assaulted the informant by means of iron rod due to which he
sustained grievous injury, this Court is not persuaded to extend
the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 1 of Cr.
Misc. 18171 of 2026, namely, Samad Imam, who is facing
specific accusation.
11. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner no. 1 of Cr. Misc. 18171 of 2026, namely, Samad
Imam stands rejected.
12. Let the other petitioners, who are facing omnibus
allegation and no specific role has been attributed, except
petitioner no. 1 of Cr. Misc. 18171 of 2026 namely, Samad
Imam, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17149 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
6/6
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Judicial Magistrate-III, 1st Class, Hilsa,
Nalanda/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Hilsa,
Nalanda/successor court/concerned court, Hilsa, Nalanda in
connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 491 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that
one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioners.
(i) that one of the bailors shall be the own/close
family members of the petitioners,
(ii) that the petitioners would not indulge in
intimidating the witnesses/informant or tampering with the
evidence, and
(iii) that in case, the petitioners shall be found indulge
in intimidating the informant/witnesses or tampering with the
evidence, the police/informant shall be at liberty to file an
application for cancellation of the bail of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.