Patna High Court
Samshul NeshaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioners' clean antecedent, lack of their names in the FIR, and the victim’s non‑supportive statement, anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC must be granted subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Samshul Nesha and Ali Akhatar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a kidnapping‑for‑marriage case (Darpa P.S. Case No.132 of 2025). The prosecution alleged that they participated in the kidnapping of an informant’s daughter, invoking Sections 137(2), 96 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic (BNS) Act, 2023. The petitioners contended they have a clean antecedent, were not named in the FIR, and were identified only through CDR location; the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 did not support the prosecution. The court examined these contentions and, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence. The order directed that the bail bond be filed with the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, and stipulated cancellation provisions for non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438(2) CrPC in view of the allegations of kidnapping for marriage.
- Whether the absence of the petitioners' names in the FIR and reliance on CDR location affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and the victim’s non‑cooperation influence the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic (BNS) Act, 2023 — s. 137(2), 3(5), 96
- Bihar Narcotic (BNSS) Act, 2023 — s. 183
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping for marriage
- clean antecedent
- FIR
- Section 438 CrPC
- bail conditions
- victim statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3456 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2025 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Samshul Nesha W/o Abbash Miyan @ Abbash Ansari Resident of Village -
Belahiya, P.S - Darpa, District - East Champaran
2. Ali Akhatar @ Ali Akhatar Miyan S/o Abbash Miyan @ Abbash Ansari
Resident of Village - Belahiya, P.S - Darpa, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anish Chandra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr.Prateek Tandon, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr.Anish Chandra, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Darpa P.S. Case No.132 of 2025, dated
19.05.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2),96,3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on
13.05.2025, accused persons including the petitioner are alleged
to have kidnapped the daughter (the victim) of the informant for
the purpose of her marriage.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3456 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent. The
allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the
petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the
FIR. Petitioners are not named in the FIR. Name of the
petitioners has been transpired during investigation on the basis
of CDR location and the victim girl has been recovered and her
statement was recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 in
which she has not supported the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioners have
clean antecedent, petitioners are not named in the FIR, name of
the petitioners has been transpired during investigation on the
basis of CDR location and the victim has not supported the case
of the prosecution, let the petitioners, above named, in the event
of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten
Thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned C.J.M., East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Darpa P.S. Case No.132 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3456 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-
(I) Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.