Patna High Court
Aftab MallicversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Aftab Mallic, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1) & 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly participating in the murder of the informant’s husband. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with four others, opened fire on the victim, who later died, and that the petitioner was part of a land‑mafia gang. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR and the eye‑witness statement of Intekhaab Alam, as well as a confessional statement of a co‑accused, did not directly implicate him, and highlighted that a similarly situated co‑accused had been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent of four prior cases. After considering the evidence and the petitioner’s custody since November 2025, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and possible cancellation if more than four cases are found.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious nature of the offences under the B.N.S. and the Arms Act
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- murder
- land mafia
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20131 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-779 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
======================================================
Aftab Mallic, S/o Mahatab Alam @ Md. Mahtab, R/o Village- Karbala, PS-
Phulwari Sharif, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shreekant Vaidya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Advocate
Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) &
61(2) of B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
informant (wife of the deceased) was going along with her
husband Sayyad Anwar Alam and nephew Intekhaab Alam on
bike towards her farm from Haroon Nagar colony to Nohsha. It
is further alleged that the petitioner along with other four
persons started firing at informant’s husband and he died due to
bullet injuries. All the assailants fled away. The informant
alleged that her husband has been killed at the behest of other
named ten accused persons. All these persons are working in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20131 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
gang of land mafia Naushad Mallick.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that the informant and
Intekhaab Alam were the eye-witness of this case. Intekhaab
Alam has given his statement under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. in
paragraph ‘87’ of the case diary wherein he has stated that he
was going to see the fields. Shahrukh and Md. Afsar pointed
gun at his uncle. When the uncle of Intekhaab, i.e. deceased
objected, Md. Afsar shot at him and it is further alleged that
Afsar again fired at the deceased. Intekhaab has seen other
persons in a four wheeler. So from the statement of eye-witness
Intekhaab it is clear that the deceased has received two firearm
injuries. During course of investigation, Md. Afsar has also
given his confessional statement and has stated that this
petitioner and others have told him to kill the deceased and in
return he will be given Five Lakh rupees and one kattha of land.
Save and except the confessional statement of the co-accused
persons, there is nothing against the petitioner. Moreover, the
main thrust of allegation is against Md. Afsar who has fired at
the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that similarly situated co-accused Akhtar Ali has been granted
bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 87752 of 2025. Moreover ,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20131 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
09.11.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed
the bail and have submitted that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of four cases.
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 released on bail in connection with
Phulwari Sharif P.S. Case No. 779 of 2025 on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned court of A.C.J.M.-IV,
Patna with the condition that while accepting the bail bonds
of the petitioner, the learned trial Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that
the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of more than four
cases, the privilege of bail shall stand cancelled.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…