Patna High Court
Md Miraz @ Ghochu @ Ghocha @ Mohammad MerajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, finding that the lack of TIP and the petitioner not being named in the FIR warranted release on bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Md Miraz, was arrested on 19 August 2025 in connection with a case registered under Sections 310(2) of the BNS and Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. Although his name was not originally mentioned in the FIR, it emerged during investigation and he confessed to the offence, also revealing that the looted articles were sold to a third party whose possession led to their recovery. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the existence of another similar case, albeit the petitioner was already on bail in that matter. The court noted the lack of a trial‑in‑police (TIP) proceeding and the fact that the petitioner was not named in the FIR, and consequently ordered his release on bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and several conditions regarding cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed the lower court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents without delaying the acceptance of the bail bond.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to a petitioner who confessed to offences under the BNS and Arms Act despite not being named in the FIR?
- Does the absence of a trial‑in‑police (TIP) proceeding justify bail?
- Should the existence of another similar case where the petitioner is already on bail affect the bail decision?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- confession
- Arms Act
- BNS
- criminal procedure
- trial in police
- bond conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17924 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2025 Thana- ASHTHAWAN District- Nalanda
======================================================
Md Miraz @ Ghochu @ Ghocha @ Mohammad Meraj Son of Md. Muslim
R/o Village - Chainpura, P.S. - Bihar, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 Heard Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
19.08.2025 in connection with Asthawan P.S. Case No. 253 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 18.07.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 310(2) of BNS and Sections 25(1-
B)a, 26,35 of Arms Act.
3. The FIR of the occurrence of loot is against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner
has been transpired during investigation. Petitioner was arrested
in Asthawan P.S.Case No.256 of 2025 and thereafter he has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17924 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
confessed his guilt in the present occurrence. Learned counsel
for the petitioner further submits that although the petitioner has
confessed his guilt in the present occurrnece and he has also
disclosed that he has sold the looted article to one Sanjay Kumar
Verma and the articles have been recovered from the house of
Sanjay Kumar Verma and till date no TIP has been conducted by
the prosecution and police, after investigation, submitted the
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 19.08.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
petitioner carries one more case other than the present one of
similar nature but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in
the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner is not
named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner has been transpired
during investigation and till date no TIP has been conducted by
the prosecution, let the petitioner, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned A.D.J.-XII, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with
Asthawan P.S. Case No. 253 of 2025, with the following
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17924 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…