Patna High Court
Md. Sahid @ Md. ShahidversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as there is no specific allegation against him and co‑accused have been granted anticipatory bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Shahid, was arrested on 15 January 2026 in connection with FIR dated 7 December 2025 alleging assault and theft under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. He applied for regular bail, contending that the FIR contains only a generic allegation against all accused and no specific charge against him. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s prior criminal record and reliance on Section 41(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court noted that co‑accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate bench, indicating the absence of individualized incriminating material against the petitioner. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent without delaying the release.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the absence of a specific allegation of assault against him in the FIR.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and the provisions of Section 41(2) of the Cr.P.C. preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to co‑accused persons influences the decision on bail for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(2), 115(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41(2)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- assault
- theft
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- CrPC 41(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22266 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2025 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia
======================================================
Md. Sahid @ Md. Shahid son of Md. Sattar Resident of Village- Murballa,
Ps- Barhara Kothi, Dist- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
15.01.2026 in connection with Barhara Kothi P.S. Case No. 254
of 2025, F.I.R. dated 07.12.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 115(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5), 109(2) of the
Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the
petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted the elder
brother of the informant by means of stick and iron rod and took
Rs.5000/- from his pocket.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22266 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
present case. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but
from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific
allegation of assault or overt act against him rather there is
general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons
including the petitioner and similarly situated co-accused
persons, namely, Sattar@ Satto & others have been granted the
privilege of anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 25.03.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.15135 of
2026 and the petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent and
petitioner has got benefit of 41(2) Cr.P.C.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against the
petitioner and similarly situated co-accused personshave been
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate
Bench of this Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned A.C.J.M-1st Purnea in connection with Barhara
Kothi P.S. Case No. 254 of 2025, subject to the following
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22266 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…