Patna High Court
Wasik @ Md. WasikversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that, where the police investigation has cleared the accused, anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to appropriate conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Md Wasik and Md Chalu, sought anticipatory bail after learning that a case had been registered against them under IPC sections 147, 149, 302, 120 B and Section 27 of the Arms Act. They claimed they were falsely implicated and that the investigating police, after a “threadbare” investigation, had submitted a final report exonerating them. The trial court, however, had taken cognizance of the FIR and was likely to order their arrest. The petitioners argued that, given the police exoneration, it would be unjust to incarcerate them and that they would cooperate with the trial if bail were granted. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the police’s exonerating report. The High Court, applying its powers under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties and conditions that the bail may be cancelled if the petitioners attempt to delay the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the investigating agency has exonerated the accused despite the trial court taking cognizance of the FIR
- Whether the petitioners are likely to abscond or tamper with the investigation
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS empowers the High Court to grant anticipatory bail in such circumstances
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 147, 149, 302
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- police exoneration
- IPC offences
- Arms Act
- Section 482
- High Court jurisdiction
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5432 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2023 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria
======================================================
1. Wasik @ Md. Wasik S/O Md. Sarfuddin Resident of Ward No- 4,
Parmandpur, P.S- Raniganj, District- Araria.
2. Md. Chalu @ Chalu @ Md. Shamshir Alam @ Shamshir @ Md. Shamsher
Alam S/O Md. Mojin Resident of Ward No- 4, Parmandpur, P.S- Raniganj,
District- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Choubey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Fahimuddin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149,
302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on 2-7-2023 at 3 pm, the cow of Sirajuddin entered
the field of Wasik, when son of Sirajuddin namely Safique went
to bring his cow back, when Wasik, Mainuddin and Jamil started
abusing and assaulted Safique by lathi, further when Safique
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5432 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
started fleeing, accused Wasik, Mainuddin and Jamil came from
behind chasing him and started firing, seeing the crowd which
has gathered at the place of occurrence, when the occurrence of
assault had taken place, further Md. Arshad gave orders to
continue with firing, next alleges that Wasik and Jamil fired at
Md. Moin, thereafter Wasik again fired causing fire-arm injury
on neck of Moin, thereafter Jamshed shot Arbaz by arrow
causing injury on finger of leg and Moin died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that police after investigation
came to a considered conclusion that petitioners are innocent
thus submitted final form (Annexure-2) in their favour
exonerating the petitioners of the allegation, but then learned
trial court differing with the police report, took cognizance
hence petitioners apprehend arrest. The learned counsel for the
petitioner next submits that when one investigating agency after
threadbare investigation came to a considered conclusion that
petitioners are innocent, whether it would be prudent for the
court to send the petitioners to jail based on an order of
cognizance which came to be taken based on the same police
report which exonerated the petitioners of the allegations. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5432 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to
the petitioners, the petitioners will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the trail to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners, but then is not in a position
to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that police after investigation submitted
final form exonerating the petitioners of the allegations.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. Rs.25000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Raniganj
P.S. Case No.274/2023 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
respective fathers, namely, Md. Sarfuddin and Md. Mojin.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event, if the
learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after
obtaining anticipatory bail is trying to delay the framing of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5432 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
charge or after framing of charge is delaying the trial in any
manner, in both the conditions the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…