Patna High Court
Md. Parvej @ MantaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail as the evidence is inconclusive and the petitioner does not pose a flight risk.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Parvej, was charged under IPC sections 302 and 34 and Arms Act section 27 for the alleged murder of an informant's son on 30-12-2022. He applied for regular bail, arguing that the FIR was filed three days after the incident, the informant’s testimony was inconsistent, and the post‑mortem showed only five entry wounds despite allegations of ten assailants, suggesting lack of concrete evidence. The State opposed bail, citing three prior criminal convictions of the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the court found the prosecution’s case insufficiently substantiated to deny bail. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for regular bail despite being charged with murder and a firearms offence
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and inconsistencies in the evidence justify denial of bail
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 34
- Arms Act 27
- criminal antecedent
- post‑mortem evidence
- FIR delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.401 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2023 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura
======================================================
Md. Parvej @ Manta S/o Late Md. Sheikh Ekbal @ Late Md. Ekbal R/o
Village - Sapardah, Ward No. 7, P.S - Puraini, District - Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.12.2022,
the son of the informant was going to Chanda from village
Saparda by his bike as he reached near Tirasi near the house of
Jaikant Thakur, heard the sound of firing. The informant went to
the place of occurrence and he saw that his son was lying on
road. It is further alleged that the petitioner and other four
persons started firing at his son. Again, five other accused
persons named in the FIR started firing at the son of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.401 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
deceased and fled from there. As he raised alarm, the villagers
arrived. The son of the informant died on the place of
occurrence itself.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the
FIR, it is clear that the date of occurrence is 30.12.2022, the
written application was given to police station on 03.01.2023
there is delay of three days which is not explained. From perusal
of the FIR, it is clear that the informant has not stated anywhere
that he was going with his son. The place of occurrence and the
village of the informant are different and it is not possible from
his village to see or hear about the occurrence. He has further
submitted that the postmortem of the deceased was conducted
on the same day and from the postmortem, it is found that five
wound of entry. Learned counsel has further submitted that as
per the FIR, there are ten assailants and it is alleged that all have
fired but in postmortem, there are only five entry wounds. The
nature of allegation is general and omnibus. Moreover, the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.11.2024.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.401 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
submitted that petitioner has got three criminal antecedent.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Puraini P.S. Case No. 01 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge, II, Madhepura.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…