Patna High Court
Md. Aliya @ Aliya Miya @ Aiya Miyan @ Alima MiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSUL
Holding
The Court held that a prior charge under Section 307 IPC is not an absolute bar to bail and granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Aliya, was charged under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly assaulting the husband of an informant, resulting in a hand injury, while a separate firearm injury to the husband was attributed to unknown persons. The petitioner, already in custody since 20‑09‑2024 for a prior case under Section 307 IPC, applied for bail. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined whether the prior 307 charge constituted an absolute bar to bail and considered that the petitioner was not the main assailant for the firearm injury. Finding that the prior case does not automatically preclude bail and noting the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the Court granted bail on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties. The order is limited to bail and does not prejudice the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving Section 307 IPC when the accused is not the principal assailant.
- Whether a prior charge under Section 307 IPC creates an absolute bar to bail in a subsequent case.
- Whether the attribution of firearm injury to unknown persons affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- Section 307 IPC
- assault
- Arms Act
- prior case
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17923 of 2026
Arising out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2024 Thana- Patarghat District- Saharsa
======================================================
Md. Aliya @ Aliya Miya @ Aiya Miyan @ Alima Miyan S/o Md. Kalim R/o
Village - Bhalwahi, Shahpur Ward No. 8, P.S - Gwalpara, District –
Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL ORDER
4 27-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in Patarghat P.S. Case No.
37 of 2024 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506/34
IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation is that on account of a prior dispute,
some persons came to the shop of the informant. The petitioner
is alleged to have assaulted the husband of the informant, which
resulted in injury to his right hand. Thereafter, unknown persons
opened fire, consequent to which the husband of the informant
sustained an injury to the abdomen. Notably, the firearm injury
is attributed to unknown persons and not to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not the main assailant. He further submits that the
petitioner is accused in two cases, i.e., one under Section 307
IPC and another under the Excise Act, and that the petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17923 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
2/3
been in custody since 20.09.2024. It is further submitted that the
prior case under Section 307 IPC does not, by itself, constitute a
bar to the grant of bail in the present matter.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering that the case arises under Section 307
IPC, that the petitioner is not the main assailant inasmuch as the
firearm injury is attributed to unknown persons, that the
petitioner has a prior case under Section 307 IPC which has
been taken into account and does not constitute an absolute bar
to bail in the facts of the present case, and that the petitioner has
been languishing in custody since 20.09.2024 without
conclusion of trial, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-
III, Saharsa in connection with Patarghat P.S. Case No.
37 of 2024 (S.Tr. No. 282 of 2025).
8. It is made clear that any observation made
herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17923 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
3/3
the purpose of adjudication of the present bail
application. Such observations shall not be construed
as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not
influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
Vikash/- (Ansul, J)
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.