Patna High Court
Shahil @ Md. ShahilversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs 10,000, two sureties, and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md Shahil, was arrested on 24‑03‑2025 in connection with a kidnapping case (PS Makhdumpur Case No. 199 of 2025) under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that Shahil abducted the complainant’s daughter, while the petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the victim’s statement under Section 183 did not mention any sexual assault and she refused a medical examination. The petitioner’s counsel sought bail, contending that the FIR was fabricated and that the evidence was insufficient, whereas the Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s involvement in the crime and a prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the court considered the nature of the offences, the lack of concrete evidence, and the petitioner’s criminal record, and decided to grant bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions. The bail order required the petitioner’s cooperation in the trial, presence at court dates, and prohibited tampering with evidence or concealment of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the existence of a prior criminal antecedent justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 and refusal of medical examination affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 183, 96
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 137
- Section 96
- Section 183
- trial cooperation
- sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65679 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Shahil @ Md. Shahil S/o Shoaib @ Shoaib Akhtar R/o vill - Piruganj, P.s. -
Tehta, Distt.- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajkumar Rajkumar S/o-Ramsawroop Ram, Vill-Tehta, P.S-Makadumpur
Dist-Jehanabad
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 19-03-2026 Despite valid service of notice, no one appeared on
behalf of Opposite Party No.2.
2. Heard Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh,learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
24.03.2025 in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 199 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 19.03.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
4. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged
that the petitioner kidnapped his daughter, namely, Raj Kumari,
when she had gone to Tehta Bypass for tuition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65679 of 2025(6) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in
the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not
committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. The statement of
the victim was recorded under Section 183 BNSS in which she has
stated that she had gone with the petitioner but she has not stated
anything about sexual assault and apart from that the victim has
refused for her medical examination. He further submits that the
police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 24.03.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner was involved in the present crime in
question and apart from that petitioner carries one criminal
antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits on the
basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on
bail in the said matter.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let
the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case
No. 199 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65679 of 2025(6) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…