Patna High Court
Saidurahman @ Sheikh SaidurahmanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the offences and the injuries sustained by the victims preclude bail at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Saidurahman, was charged under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 127(2), 109(1), 118(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the Bihar Penal Code for allegedly stabbing two persons, Raushan and Chandan, with a knife, causing serious injuries to vital parts of their bodies. The petitioner contended that he was innocent, had no prior criminal record, and had been in judicial custody since 20‑12‑2025, seeking regular bail. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the gravity of the offences, the nature of the injuries, and the alleged repetition of blows. After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the seriousness of the charges and the injuries warranted denial of bail at this stage. The court rejected the bail application but allowed the petitioner to renew the request after six months if the trial remained pending, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner given the seriousness of the offences and the nature of the injuries inflicted.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 127(2), 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault with knife
- serious offences
- trial expediting
- injury to vital parts
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20812 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2025 Thana- PURUSHOTTAMPUR District- West
Champaran
======================================================
Saidurahman @ Sheikh Saidurahman Son of Sheikh Sohrab @ soharab
Shaikh Resident of Village -Bherihari Police station- Purushottampur District
-West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bashishtha Narayan Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in
connection with Purushottampur P.S. Case No. 138 of 2025
instituted for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2),
127(2), 109(1), 118(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has
assaulted with knife to Raushan and the informant Chandan.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has further
submitted that there is no repetition of blow. A statement has
been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20812 of 2026(3) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial
custody since 20.12.2025.
5. From perusal of the order of the learned trial court,
it is clear that the learned trial court has recorded that Chandan
Kumar has received following injuries:-
Incised stab wound 3cm x ½ cm x ½ cm present on right side
part of chest and incised wound 5cm x ½ cm x ½ cm with viscera present
on left side lower abdomen.
6. As far as injuries of Raushan are concerned: they
are following :-
Incised wound 3cm x ½ cm x ½ cm present on mid part head
left side and incised wound 4 cm x ½ cm x ½ cm present mid part of lower
abdomen.
7. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and has
submitted that this petitioner has stabbed two persons with knife
and the injuries were received on vital part. There is also
repetition of blow.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and considering the facts and cirumstances of this case as stated
above, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail
at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
9. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20812 of 2026(3) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.
10. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same within the stipulated period of time.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.