Patna High Court
Faij Rahman @ Faiz RahmanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Faij Rahman, arrested on 20 July 2025 for alleged abduction of the informant's daughter under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, 2023, applied for bail. The prosecution, supported by the informant, opposed bail, relying on the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023. The petitioner contended that the FIR was fabricated, he has a clean antecedent, and that a co‑accused in a similar case had already been granted bail. The court examined the allegations, the victim's statement, and the precedent of bail to a co‑accused, and concluded that bail could be granted with safeguards. Accordingly, the court ordered release on bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, 2023.
- Whether the victim's statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the alleged fabrication of the FIR and the clean antecedent of the petitioner justify bail.
- Whether the bail granted to a co‑accused in a similar case influences the present bail application.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 137(2), 87
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 183
Subjects
- bail
- abduction
- false allegations
- criminal procedure
- Section 183
- Section 137
- Section 87
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26245 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Faij Rahman @ Faiz Rahman S/O Mohammad Nayeem @ Md. Naim R/o -
Islam Nagar, near YMCA Hospital, P.S - Daily Market, Ranchi,Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 Heard Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
for the petitioner, Mr. Raju Kumar, learned counsel for the
informant and Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
20.07.2025 in connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 113
of 2025, F.I.R. dated 17.07.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along
with other accused persons have abducted the daughter of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26245 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that the
petitioner is the friend of the co-accused, namely, Raj Aryan @
Pappu and the victim was in love relation with the said Raj
Aryan @ Pappu and the only allegation against the petitioner is
that he has helped his friend Raj Aryan @ Pappu. He further
submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge
sheet against the petitioner. He further submits that similarly
situated, co-accused, namely, Raj Aryan @ Pappu against whom
there is allegation that he has abducted the daughter of the
informant has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 21.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
75985 of 2025. The petitioner is in custody since 20.07.2025.
5. The learned counsel for the informant as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits the statement of
the victim was recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023
in which she has stated the name of the petitioner.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26245 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM,
Samastipur in connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 113
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)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…