Patna High Court

Md Waquar @ Waquar AhmadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 January 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Md Waquar Ahmad, was arrested in connection with a case alleging indiscriminate firing and multiple offences under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act. The prosecution claimed he fired at several individuals, while the defence argued he was falsely implicated, citing minor injuries to the alleged victim and a concurrent land dispute. The State opposed bail, highlighting a prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the court considered the nature of the injuries, the lack of conclusive evidence, and the petitioner’s prolonged custody since May 2025. The court granted bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail
Whether the evidence of injury and the counter‑version of the case justify continued detention

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 119(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 305, 308(2), 326, 351(2), 352, 61(2), 76

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Arms Act
serious offences
prior criminal antecedent
land dispute
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57667 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2024 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Md Waquar @ Waquar Ahmad S/O Rafi Alam Resident of village- Akarthapa,
                 Ward No.- 08, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
                                                  Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

7   06-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 254 of 2024 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2),

                   308(2), 109, 119(1), 352, 351(2), 326, 305, 76, 61(2), 191(2),

                   190 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the

                   petitioner, along with others, arrived at the door of the

                   informant, and it is further alleged that the petitioner started

                   making indiscriminate firing. Thereafter, Md. Safi Ahmad fired

                   a musket at Tarique. Md. Rahul fired with a country-made pistol

                   at Parween.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57667 of 2025(7) dt.06-01-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

          allegation is that the petitioner fired at Md. Rashid, and from

          perusal of the injury report of Md. Rashid, it is clear that he has

          received two pellet injuries on his right arm and left knee. The

          nature of injury is simple in nature. It has also been submitted

          that apart from this, there is a counter version of this case and

          there is also a land dispute between the parties. He further

          submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

          since 25.05.2025.

                       5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by

          learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the

          informant and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

          antecedent of one case.

                       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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

          of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57667 of 2025(7) dt.06-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Magistrate, 1st Class, Araria in connection with Bhargama P.S.

                     Case No. 254 of 2024.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…