Patna High Court
Vakil Nat @ Jameel NatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, directing release upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Vakil Nat @ Jameel Nat, sought bail in a case (PS Case No. 146 of 2025) involving offences under several sections of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising from the alleged assault and death of a husband. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was attacked by a group of nine persons, including the petitioner, based on confessional statements of co‑accused Amit and Atabul Shekh, although the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no role in the assault, and highlighted that other co‑accused had already been granted bail in similar matters. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent of eight prior cases. After hearing both sides, the court found the petitioner’s claim of innocence credible and, despite the prior cases, ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious charges under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement, based only on co‑accused confessional statements, warrants continued detention
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- B.N.S. 2023
- Arms Act
- prior criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23614 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Vakil Nat @ Jameel Nat S/O Bhuil Nat @ Jalil Nat Resident of Village-
Rohua, P.S.- Sonbarsa, Dist- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Sonbersa P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2),
118(1), 303(2), 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
husband of the deceased had gone with Amit Kumar and
Abhishek Baitha towards Sitamarhi. As the informant suspected
that some untoward incident might take place, she along with
her brother-in-law also proceeded on a bike towards Rohua. As
they reached near village-Rohua, she found that nine persons are
present there. It is alleged that Chandan Mahto was armed with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23614 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
dabia and assaulted the husband of the informant with the same,
as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. He also submits that nine persons are named in the FIR.
Five persons are alleged to have assaulted the deceased. He also
submits that the name of the petitioner is not there in the FIR.
During the course of investigation, co-accused Amit and Atabul
Shekh have named this petitioner in their confessional
statement. He further submits that the co-accused who are
named in this case have been granted bail by this court vide Cr.
Misc. Nos. 1640 of 2026 and 10728 of 2026. The case of this
petitioner stands on better footing. Moreover, the petitioner is
languishing in judicial custody since 02.11.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal
antecedent of eight 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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23614 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Sitamarhi in connection with Sonbersa P.S.
Case No. 146 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.