Patna High Court
Md. AkbarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that insufficient specific material existed to deny anticipatory bail to petitioners Nos.2‑5, but the allegation against petitioner No.1 warranted denial of anticipatory bail, though regular bail may be considered upon surrender.
Summary
The petitioners, five residents of Barharwa village, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code and the Bihar Negotiable Security Act, 2023, alleging assault and robbery. The prosecution alleged that the accused had assaulted the informant’s wife and daughter, snatched Rs.5,000 and threatened them. The petitioners contended that they were falsely implicated, had clean records, and that there was a case‑and‑counter‑case between the parties. The informant and the State opposed bail, especially for petitioner No.1, Akbar, who was specifically alleged to have used a sharp weapon. The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Nos.2‑5 on furnishing a bond of Rs.30,000 each, but denied anticipatory bail to petitioner No.1, directing the trial court to consider his regular bail application if he surrenders within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under the Bihar Negotiable Security Act, 2023 in view of the allegations made in the FIR?
- Whether the specific allegation against petitioner No.1 justifies denial of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Security Act, 2023 — s. 2(1)(d), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Negotiable Security Act
- section 482
- section 2(1)(d)
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21837 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2026 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
1. Md. Akbar S/o- Late Bholu @ Late Md. Bholu R/v- Barharwa Ps- Dumra
Dist- Sitamarhi
2. Md. Lalbabu @ Md. Lalu S/o- Md. Akbar R/v- Barharwa Ps- Dumra Dist-
Sitamarhi
3. Md. Guddu @ Md. Sabbir S/o- Md. Akbar R/v- Barharwa Ps- Dumra Dist-
Sitamarhi
4. Tabsum Pravin @ Tabhasum Pravin W/o- Md. Wajir R/v- Barharwa Ps-
Dumra Dist- Sitamarhi
5. Md. Sahida Khatoon @ Sahida Khatoon W/o- Md. Lalubabu @ Lalu R/v-
Barharwa Ps- Dumra Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Krishna Murari, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and
Learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable in connection with Dumra
P.S. Case No.01 of 2026 under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1),
303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
the seven accused persons including the petitioners with
allegation that they have assaulted the informant’s wife and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21837 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
daughter due to which injury took place. They have also
snatched Rs.5000/- and threaten them.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He
submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the specific allegation is
against petitioner No.1 that he has assaulted by sharp weapon.
5. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the
petitioners is clean. He further submits that petitioners and
informant are resident of same village and well-known to each
other. He further submits that there is case and counter-case
between the parties.
6. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail and submits that bail application of
petitioners may be rejected as there is allegation of assault
against all the accused persons.
7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners and submits that there is nothing specific
against petitioners except petitioner No.1.
8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case
and the submissions made above, let the petitioner Nos.2 to 5
namely, Md. Lalbabu, Md Guddu, Tabsum Pravin, Md. Sahida
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21837 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
Khatoon, be granted bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand)
each as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the
satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi or its
successor Court, Sitamarhi, in connection with Dumra P.S. Case
No.01 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s
482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
9. So far as the petitioner No.1, namely, Mr. Akbar is
concerned, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to
the petitioner No.1, therefore the bail application of the
petitioner Ns.1 is hereby rejected.
10. However, Trial Court is directed to consider the
regular bail application of the petitioner No.1, namely, Mr.
Akbar, if he surrender within six weeks from today and prays
for regular bail, then Trial Court shall pass order on merit
without being prejudice of the present order.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.