Patna High Court
Md. NaushadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Naushad, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 382 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged road robbery. He claimed the FIR was initially against unknown persons and that his name was later added based on a confessional statement of an accused in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s six prior cases and the seriousness of the offence. The petitioner also contended that he was in judicial custody at the time of the alleged incident, raising a question of his involvement. After considering the antecedents, the nature of the offence, and the lack of substantive evidence, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's prayer.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in a road robbery case under Section 382 IPC given his prior criminal record.
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can be the basis for naming the petitioner in the FIR.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged judicial custody at the time of the incident affects the bail consideration.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 382
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- road robbery
- Section 382 IPC
- criminal procedure
- bail
- prior convictions
- confession in police custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58186 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2017 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Md. Naushad S/o Md. Zakki Ahmed R/o vill - Benibad, P.S. - Gaighat, Distt.-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 382 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases and
the informant alleges that on 26.01.2017, at about 09:00 p.m., he
was travelling alone in his Scorpio and was heading towards
Lalganj when at around 10:30 p.m. a Black Silver Scorpio
overtook his vehicle and two persons were sitting in the
Scorpio, whose faces were visible in the torch light, and asked
him to stop and said that Saheb was calling him so he got out of
the vehicle thereafter the two accused took him in their vehicle
and two other accused took his vehicle towards Anjanpir and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58186 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026
2/3
thereafter they dropped him near Naga Police Station.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR
is against unknown and the name of the petitioner transpired
during the course of investigation based on the confessional
statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has
antecedent of six cases and it is a case of road robbery and the
case is of the year 2017.
6. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner submits that on the date of occurrence, the
petitioner was in judicial custody on which learned A.P.P.
submits that the same is an aspect of investigation as to whether
the petitioner from the jail got the occurrence committed or not.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P. for the State and taking into consideration the fact that
petitioner has antecedent of six cases and the case is of the year
2017, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Hajipur
Sadar P.S. Case No. 31 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hajipur at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58186 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026
3/3
Vashali/Successor Court.
8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.