Patna High Court
Md. Samim @ Jamshed @ Shekh SamimversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court refused bail, permitting the petitioner to renew the bail application after six months and directing a speedy trial.
Summary
Md. Samim was charged with murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the killing of the informant's husband. The prosecution relied on a confessional statement by the informant's brother that he had directed Samim to commit the murder, CCTV identification, and blood‑stained clothing, while only two witnesses had been examined. Samim, who has no prior criminal record and has been in custody since 28‑05‑2024, sought bail after an earlier bail petition was rejected with a direction to renew after six months. The High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant bail at this stage, allowing a renewal of the bail petition after six months and directing the trial court to conclude the trial promptly through a calendar trial. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed pending any future renewal.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of the evidence (confessional statement, CCTV, blood‑stained clothes) to justify denial of bail?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 of the CrPC at this stage of the investigation?
- Whether the trial should be expedited to avoid undue delay?
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 439
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 34
- confessional statement
- CCTV evidence
- speedy trial
- calendar trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18011 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2024 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna
======================================================
Md. Samim @ Jamshed @ Shekh Samim S/o Md. Mursid R/o Village-
Kelabari, P.S- Puraini, Dist- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate.
For the Informant : Mr. Manish Prakash, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Raniya Talab P.S. Case No. 186 of 2024 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the bail petition of this petitioner was rejected vide order
dated 22.03.2025 with a liberty to renew his prayer for bail after
six months.
4. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that some
unknown miscreants have killed the husband of the informant.
The brother of the informant namely, Shamsher has given in his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18011 of 2026(4) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
confessional statement that he has directed the petitioner to kill
the husband of the informant (deceased). He also submits that
Save and except confessional statement of the brother, there is
nothing against him. In Para 14 of the case diary, there is
description of CCTV footage and the petitioner was identified
by the villagers in CCTV footage and was found in dubious
circumstances on the date of the occurrence and the blood stain
clothes which he was keeping in a bag was also recovered.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
report from the learned trial court has been called and from the
report of the learned trial court, it is clear that only two
witnesses have been examined till today.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that
petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in
judicial custody since 28.05.2024.
7. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage,
however he may renew his prayer for bail after six months if the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18011 of 2026(4) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
trial is not concluded.
9. Learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial
within same time.
10. This Court would advise the learned trial court to
conduct a calendar trial for expeditious disposal of the present
case.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.