Patna High Court
Jahiruddin Miyan @ Jahiruddin AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the assault was grievous and the petitioners have prior criminal records.
Summary
The petitioners, Jahiruddin Miyan and Rizwan Miyan, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Manuapul PS Case No.71 of 2025) involving multiple offences under the Bihar Non‑Compulsory Act, 2023, including assault causing grievous injury to the informant’s daughter. The petitioners argued that the incident was a minor altercation and that medical evidence did not show a ‘farsa’ injury, seeking bail on the basis of cooperation and lack of intent. The State and the informant opposed bail, highlighting the serious nature of the assault, the grievous injury documented in the injury report, and the petitioners’ prior criminal antecedents (three for petitioner 1 and one for petitioner 2). The court examined the gravity of the alleged assault, the presence of grievous injury, and the criminal records, and concluded that these factors outweighed the petitioners’ request for bail. Consequently, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application but directed that if the petitioners surrender within four weeks, their bail may be reconsidered. The order underscores the court’s emphasis on public safety and the seriousness of the charges.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail given the seriousness of the alleged assault and the presence of grievous injury.
- Whether the petitioners’ prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail under the applicable provisions.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- grievous injury
- criminal antecedent
- pre‑arrest bail
- Bihar Non‑Compulsory Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71636 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2025 Thana- Manuapul District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Jahiruddin Miyan @ Jahiruddin Ansari S/o- Late Manauwar Miyan Resident
of village- Bharpatiya W.No-13, Ps- Manuapul Dist- West Champaran
2. Rizwan Miyan @ Rizwan Ansari S/o- Late Manauwar Miyan Resident of
village- Bharpatiya W.No-13, Ps- Manuapul Dist- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Avinash Raj, Adv.
Mr. Sachidanand Rai, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners,
learned Advocate for the informant and the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Manuapul P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
118(1), 109(1), 76, 303(2), 3(5), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS,
2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is of causing
assault by means of farsa and rod over the daughter of the
informant, due to which she sustained serious injuries. Besides
there is further allegation of causing assault to the informant and
others as well as snatching of valuables.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71636 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that
on account of a trifle, both the parties have entered into a free
fight, resulting into some unfortunate injuries to the persons of
both the sides. There is counter version of the present case being
Manuapul P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025 instituted against the
informant and others. The entire allegation of causing farsa
blow falls to the ground for the simple reason that the doctor has
not found any farsa injury on the person of informant’s
daughter, is the contention of the learned Advocate for the
petitioners. The petitioners though bears criminal antecedent,
however, they submits that they will fully co-operate in the
proceeding of the Court and would not indulge in such
incidence in future.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
and the informant opposed the pre-arrest bail application and
taking this Court through the FIR contended that there is
specific accusation against both these petitioners of causing
assault by means of farsa and garasa, due to which the
informant’s daughter sustained grievous injury, as is evident
from the injury report, besides the petitioner no. 1 is carrying
three criminal antecedent whereas petitioner no. 2 bears one
criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71636 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the fact that the assault caused by petitioner no. 2 is found to be
grievous in nature and he bears one criminal antecedent,
whereas the petitioner no. 1 bears three criminal antecedent and
he also actively participated in the crime and assaulted the
victim, due to which she sustained injury. This Court is not
acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. However, if the petitioners shall surrender before
the Court below preferably within a period of four weeks, from
today, their prayer for bail shall be considered without being
prejudice by the order of this Court.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.