Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. SalmanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Salman, was arrested in connection with a case involving assault with a cricket wicket, alleged to have occurred during a dispute among boys. He was charged under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109(1) and 103(1) of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, noting that his name does not appear in the FIR and that the only evidence against him is the confessional statements of co‑accused. He has no prior criminal record and has been in judicial custody since 10 January 2026. The State opposed bail, but the Court, after considering the lack of direct evidence and the petitioner’s clean record, ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The order directs the petitioner to appear before the CJM as required.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted when the only evidence against the accused is the confessional statements of co‑accused.
  • Whether the absence of the accused's name in the FIR and lack of prior criminal antecedents justify bail.
  • Whether the nature of the offences under the B.N.S. warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2)

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • confessional statement
  • false implication
  • assault
  • judicial custody
  • B.N.S. sections

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18801 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2025 Thana- BIHAR District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Salman, S/o Zainul Biryani @ Md Jainu, R/o vill - Chhajju, P.S -
                 Biharsharif, District - Nalanda

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Diwakar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Bihar (Biharsharif) P.S. Case No. 333 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2),

                   109(1) and 103(1) of B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that there was

                   some dispute between the boys on the point of playing cricket. It is

                   alleged that 15-20 boys came in a group and started assaulting Md.

                   Nadim with wicket. It is specifically alleged that Raj, Md. Amam,

                   Md. Isuf, son of Mintu Chudiwala and the son Abas have assaulted

                   with wicket.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18801 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                         2/2




                       offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. From perusal

                       of the F.I.R., it will transpire that the name of this petitioner is not

                       there in the F.I.R. His name has surfaced during investigation in

                       the confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Md. Shahjeb

                       and Damodar. It has further been submitted that save and except

                       the confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing against

                       the petitioner. He was not present at the place of occurrence. He is

                       having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial

                       custody since 10.01.2026.

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the application for bail.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                       inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                       petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond

                       of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the

                       like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Nalanda

                       at Biharsharif in connection with Bihar (Biharsharif) P.S. Case

                       No. 333 of 2025.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.