Patna High Court
Md. Tahsib @ LaluversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to monetary bond and specific conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Tahsib @ Lalu, was arrested on 6 January 2026 in connection with a murder case (FIR dated 19 August 2025) and charged under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was part of a mob that conspired and used deadly weapons, resulting in the death of the informant's son. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he has a clean antecedent, that the FIR does not specifically allege any overt act by him, and that he was merely a member of the mob, not the shooter. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s inclusion in the FIR. The Court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions of cooperation, presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if the petitioner violates any condition.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being named in the FIR for murder and related offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the lack of a specific allegation of an overt act against the petitioner justifies grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing the trial.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- murder
- conspiracy
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- pre‑trial detention
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24227 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-557 Year-2025 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
Md. Tahsib @ Lalu Son of Md. Nasim @ Md. Sohrab Resident of Village -
Dauna, P.S.- Amarpur, District - Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Zainul Abedin, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
06.01.2026 in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 557 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 19.08.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,
2023.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 19.08.2025
at about 01.00A.M, the informant alleged that his son was shot
and murdered near village Hanua. According to the informant,
the petitioner along with other co-accused persons assembled
with deadly weapons as part of a pre-planned conspiracy and
one of the accused fired a gunshot at the chest of his son,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24227 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
causing him to collapse and lie in pool of blood.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Although the petitioner is named
in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that co-
accused, Md. Imran, fired a gunshot at the chest of the
informant’s son, as a result of which he sustained injuries and
subsequently succumbed to them. He further submits that there
is no specific allegation of assault or overt act or firing
attributed against the petitioner and at best the petitioner is
member of the mob. He further submits that the police after
investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner
and the petitioner is in custody since 06.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that petitioner is named in the FIR but fairly submits that
co-accused, Md. Imran had fired a gunshot at the chest of son of
the informant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
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 Chief
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24227 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Amarpur P.S.
Case No. 557 of 2025, subject to the following 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…