Patna High Court
Md. MumtazversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Md. Mumtaz and Md. Saddam Quraishi, were charged under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Their earlier application for regular bail was rejected, with the court directing a possible renewal after four months. They have been in custody since 1 March 2025, while the trial has only examined four witnesses and another co‑accused was granted bail. The petitioners argued that continued pre‑trial detention violates their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed bail, but the court held that further detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21, and therefore granted bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties each.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioners' right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the earlier order’s condition of a four‑month renewal period precludes granting bail at this stage.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30878 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2025 Thana- PARWALPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Md. Mumtaz S/o- Md. Razi Ahmad Village- Mafi PS-Ashthawan District-
Nalanda, Bihar
2. Md. Saddam Quraishi S/o- Md. Baudhu Quraishi Village- Mafi PS-
Ashthawan District- Nalanda, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with
Parwalpur P.S. Case No. 28 of 2025, instituted for the offence
under Sections 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 11.11.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 52138 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioners was
rejected by this Court considering the recovery of theft articles
from the house of the petitioners with a liberty to renew the
prayer after four months, if the trial is not concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to
the petitioners. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 30878 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
framed and till date four witnesses have been examined, which
is evident from the impugned order itself. It has been submitted
on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody
since 01.03.2025. Learned counsel further submits that other co-
accused has been granted bail by this Bench on 15.10.2025
passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 51146 of 2025. Learned
counsel further submits that there is no likelihood of the trial
being concluded in the near future. Learned counsel goes on to
submit that the continued incarceration of the petitioners
without conclusion of trial amounts to a gross violation of the
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, which is reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court
in plethora of judgments.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioners
and taking into account the fact that continued detention of the
petitioners would serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial
incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 30878 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with
Parwalpur P.S. Case No. 28 of 2025.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.