Patna High Court
Ali Akhtar MiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, four brothers from Belahiya, filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in Darpa P.S. Case No.62 of 2024, which alleged offences of assault, robbery, attempt to outrage modesty and other serious crimes under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR claimed they entered the informant’s house armed, assaulted the informant’s side, attempted to outrage the modesty of Sabina Khatun and stole personal belongings. The petitioners contended they are innocent, have clean antecedents, and that the incident was a neighbour dispute over drainage, describing the allegations as general and omnibus. The State opposed the bail. After hearing, the Court held that the seriousness of the charges and the nature of the alleged offences warranted denial of anticipatory bail, but directed the petitioners to surrender within four weeks for the trial court to consider a surrender‑cum‑bail application on merits. Consequently, the anticipatory bail petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the serious IPC offences alleged against the petitioners
- Whether the petitioners’ claim of innocence, clean antecedent and neighbour‑dispute context outweighs the gravity of the charges
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 324, 325, 341, 354(B), 379, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- robbery
- outraging modesty
- bail jurisprudence
- neighbor dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26847 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2024 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Ali Akhtar Miyan S/O Wakil Miyan Resident of Village- Belahiya, P.S.-
Darpa, District- East Champaran
2. Jabir Miyan S/O Wakil Miyan Resident of Village- Belahiya, P.S.- Darpa,
District- East Champaran
3. Munnaf Miyan S/O Wakil Miyan Resident of Village- Belahiya, P.S.- Darpa,
District- East Champaran
4. Shami Akhtar Miyan @ Shami AKhtar S/O Wakil Miyan Resident of
Village- Belahiya, P.S.- Darpa, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 62 of 2024 lodged on
24.04.2024, for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 149,
341, 323, 354(B), 324, 325, 307, 379, 504 & 506 of the Indian
Penal Code, pending in the Court of J.M. 1st Class, Motihari,
East Champaran,.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
14 named accused persons including the present petitioners with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26847 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
allegation that they have entered in the house of the informant
armed with weapon and assaulted the informant’s side and also
tried to outrage the modesty of one Sabina Khatun. The accused
persons also took away the personal belongings of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel submits that the petitioners’ side and the informant’s
side are next door neighbours and with regard to drainage, the
scuffling took place between them. He submits that there is
general and omnibus allegation against the present petitioners.
Counsel also submits that the petitioners were granted police
bail, but the Magistrate has taken cognizance against the
petitioners. Counsel further submits that the petitioners have
clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners.
6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners stand rejected.
7. However, if petitioners surrender before the
concerned Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26847 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
then in that case, the Trial Court is directed to pass order on
their surrender-cum-bail application on the same day, without
being prejudice that the anticipatory bail of the petitioners has
been rejected by this Court and the Trial Court shall pass order
on the merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…