Patna High Court
Abdul BarikversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that, in view of the grave nature of the offences, the alleged involvement in a murder, and the petitioner’s antecedent cases, bail could not be granted.
Summary
Abdul Barik was arrested in connection with a land‑dispute incident that allegedly resulted in assault, murder and other violent offences under several sections of the IPC. He applied for bail, claiming the FIR was forged and that he was falsely implicated due to village politics. The prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the charges, including murder, assault with a knife, and the petitioner’s prior criminal cases. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found the allegations prima facie sufficient and considered the gravity of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedents. Consequently, the court refused bail and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the nature and seriousness of the offences alleged.
- Whether the alleged fabrication of the FIR negates the necessity for bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 302, 307, 323, 324, 34, 341, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- murder
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3167 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2024 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar
======================================================
Abdul Barik Son of Nurul Islam R/o Chhota Lakhanpur, P.S. - Amdabad,
Distt.- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Prabhojat Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Mohit Ranjan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-03-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioner, Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the informant and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
15.05.2025 in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 124 of
2024 for the offences punishable under Sections
341,323,324,307,302, 504, 506, 34 and 120(B) of IPC.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that due to land
dispute all of the named accused persons came at the house of
the informant and started to abuse and assault the informant and
his family members. One Abdul Bark nabbed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3167 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
a knife on the back of Rabiul Alam, Faruk Alam assaulted on his
head, Md. Sharif pulled the knife, then after his brother died on
spot. All of the accused persons assaulted the informant on his
thumb of left hand by means of lathi for which he sustained
injury. One Mojibur Rahman and Mahboob Alam assaulted to
one Asfaque Alam, Mahfooz Alam and Abdulla Wahid, for
which they also get injured. The local persons came
forward then all of the accused persons fled away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
It is next submitted that due to village politics the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in the present case.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and
learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submit that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR it appears that there is two specific allegation against the
petitioner and deceased has died on the spot. It is next submitted
that there is specific allegation of assault by means of knife
upon the deceased. Apart from aforesaid, petitioner has
antecedent of two cases other than the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3167 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection
with S. Tr. No. 484 of 2024 arising out of Amdabad P.S. Case
No. 124 of 2024 pending in the court of learned District and
Additional District & Sessions Judge-I, Katihar.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, the learned trial court is directed to
expedite and conclude the trial.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.