Patna High Court
Lukman AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is not granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, three residents of Gururu village, sought anticipatory bail after being named in FIR No.203 of 2025 for alleged offences arising from a communal clash in Gurua, Gaya. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners participated in stone‑throwing that injured a wedding party, resulting in the death of Nanhku Yadav, and charged them under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, that no incriminating material was found on them, and that the allegations were vague and omnibus, urging the court to grant anticipatory bail. The State opposed, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the death caused. The High Court, after considering the submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing that the petitioners may surrender within four weeks and then apply for regular bail before the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the charges including sections 191, 127, 115, 117, 109, 132, 299 and 103.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 109, 115, 117, 127, 132, 191, 299
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- communal violence
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- section 191
- section 127
- section 115
- section 117
- section 109
- section 132
- section 299
- section 103
- stone pelting
- death
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52999 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2025 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Lukman Alam S/o Budhu Mian R/o Vill- Gururu, P.S.- Gurua, Distt- Gaya
2. Shamsher Alam @ Md Shamsher Alam S/o Salahu Mian @ Mohammad
Shalahuddin Miyan R/o Vill- Gururu, P.S.- Gurua, Distt- Gaya
3. Raushan Alam S/o Mumtaz Alam R/o Vill- Gururu, P.S.- Gurua, Distt- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Gurua P.S. Case No. 203 of 2025, instituted for the
offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 127(1),
115(2), 117(2), 109, 132, 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and later on Section 103(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 was added.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the police
received information about the fight breaking out between two
communities. Police reached the spot and found some persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52999 of 2025(5) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
involved in the clash who received injuries. On further
investigation, the police came to know about the petitioners and
a number of other co-accused persons, who were creating a
religious frenzy and indulged in attacking each other and
causing injuries to a number of persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence as
alleged against them and have falsely been implicated in the
present case. No incriminating material have been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioners. No occurrence
as alleged has ever taken place. The petitioners have not caused
any injury to any person. It is apparent from the FIR that
exchange of abuse took place and both sides sustained injuries.
It is further submitted that there is no specific allegation levelled
against the petitioners rather the same is general and omnibus in
nature. Petitioner No. 2 bears no criminal antecedent, petitioner
No.1 bears one criminal antecedent, whereas petitioner No.3
bears two criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the
petitioners further submits that similarly situated co-accused has
been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated
20.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 55916 of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52999 of 2025(5) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
Petitioners are FIR named accused person and they have pelted
stones and bricks chips on the wedding party due to which
Nanhku Yadav received injury, and later on, he succumbed to
injury.
6. Considering the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact
that petitioners are named in the FIR, this Court is not inclined
to enlarge them on anticipatory bail. Prayer for anticipatory bail
is hereby rejected.
7. However, if the petitioners surrenders before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays
for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court
below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the
order of this Court.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…