Patna High Court
Tabrej @ Tabrej AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to a bail bond, payment of compensation, and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case arising from a land dispute where they were alleged to have assaulted the informant and her husband with a sword, causing simple injuries. The FIR, registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleged assault and related offences. The petitioners submitted that they have no prior criminal record, the injuries were minor, and they were willing to pay Rs.2,000 each to the informant as compensation. The State opposed the bail, maintaining that the allegations of assault warranted detention. Considering the lack of antecedent, the nature of injuries, and the petitioners' willingness to compensate, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and several conditions including regular attendance before the police and trial court. The order also required payment of the compensation to the informant via demand draft at the time of bail bond execution.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged assault under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the nature of injuries and absence of criminal antecedent justify bail
- Whether the petitioners' offer to pay compensation to the informant affects the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- assault
- simple injury
- compensation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66330 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2025 Thana- JOKIHAT District- Araria
======================================================
1. Tabrej @ Tabrej Alam S/o Suleman R/o Village - Simariya, Ward No. 5, P.S
- Jokihat, District- Araria
2. Ubesh @ Md. Ubesh S/o Suleman R/o Village - Simariya, Ward No. 5, P.S -
Jokihat, District- Araria
3. Jamshed S/o Suleman R/o Village - Simariya, Ward No. 5, P.S - Jokihat,
District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rama Nand Poddar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Rama Nand Poddar, learned counsel
for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No. 184 of 2025 registered
for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 303(2), 352,
351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, lodged on
10.06.2025 by the informant, Tanzeela.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on the land dispute issue, the accused persons firstly abused
and then assaulted. Allegation is that Tabrej (petitioner no.1)
assaulted Jubeda by using a sword while Ubesh (petitioner no.2)
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66330 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
assaulted her husband Sabiruddin again on the head and lastly,
Jamshed (petitioner no.3) assaulted the informant by farsa, as a
result whereof, all of them got injured. They were shifted to
Referral Hospital, Jokihat which followed the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
admittedly, there is a land dispute, case and counter case, the
Referral Hospital, Jokihat, Araria has recorded the injuries of all
the three injured as simple in nature, these petitioners do not
have criminal antecedent. Last submission is that without
accepting the allegation or outcome of the present petition, the
petitioners intend to pay Rs.2,000/- each (totaling Rs.6,000/-) to
the informant towards treatment by Demand Draft issued by the
local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank
to be submitted at the time of execution of bail bond.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
though there is case and counter case allegation of assault is
against all these three petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the materials on record, though the allegation is there, case and
counter case have been lodged, the injuries have been found to
be simple in nature, they do not have criminal antecedent, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66330 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs.2,000/-
each (totaling Rs.6,000/-) to the informant as undertaken by the
learned counsel for the petitioners through Demand Draft issued
by the local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized
Bank to be submitted at the time of execution of the bail bond
and the same shall be handed over to the informant after
checking the credentials.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, in
connection with Jokihat P.S. Case No. 184 of 2025 subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66330 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
(iii) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for next six months to mark their
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted
before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…