Patna High Court

Md. Zahid @ Ghutti @ ZahidversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 21 January 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

Holding

The court refused to grant bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Md. Zahid was implicated in a theft case (Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2025) for the alleged snatching of Rs. 34,000, an Aadhaar card and a mobile phone. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that he was not named in the FIR, no direct or indirect evidence linked him to the crime, and nothing was recovered from his possession. The State presented a police report indicating that the Aadhaar card and mobile were seized from the petitioner’s conscious possession and that the investigation was complete with a charge sheet filed. The court examined the FIR, case diary, and the police report, noting the specific allegations and the gravity of the offence under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023. Considering these facts, the court declined to grant regular bail, directing that the petitioner may renew his bail application after completing one year of custody.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023 in view of the alleged evidence and gravity of the offence
Whether the petitioner’s claim of lack of direct or indirect evidence warrants release on bail

Legislation cited

BNS, 2023 — s. 309(4)

Subjects

bail
theft
Section 309(4)
BNS 2023
investigation
possession
charge sheet
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73647 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Zahid @ Ghutti @ Zahid, Male, aged about 19 years, Son of Md.
                 Naushad, Resident of Village- Manzi Mubarak P.S.- Kalyanpur District-
                 Samastipur, Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
              ======================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
                                    ORAL ORDER

3   21-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2025 instituted for the offences

                   punishable under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023.

                                3. As per allegation in the FIR, three unknown

                   persons snatched the purse and took away Rs. 34,000/-, Aadhaar

                   Card and the mobile phone of the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has

                   falsely been implicated in this case only on the basis of

                   suspicion. He submits that there is no any evidence either direct

                   or indirect against the petitioner. He further submits that the

                   petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73647 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
                                            2/3




          surfaced in this case during the course of investigation on the

          secret information by the police informer. He next submits that

          nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of

          the petitioner. He lastly submits that the petitioner has not put on

          Test Identification Parade till date. Petitioner is in custody since

          25.06.2025.

                        5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner.

                       6. From perusal of the FIR, case diary and also

          perused the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the

          learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Samastipur, it

          appears that allegation against this petitioner is specific. From

          perusal of the records, it also appears that on the basis of written

          report of the informant Md. Nasir, FIR has been registered under

          Section      309(4) of the BNS, 2023 against three unknown

          persons. During investigation a sum of Rs. 6,100/- Adhar Card

          of informant and looted mobile have been seized by the police

          from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. It is also

          stated that investigation has already been concluded and charge

          sheet has been submitted in this case, so considering the facts

          and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned

          counsel for the parties as well as the gravity of offence, I am not
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73647 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                                   7. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby

                      rejected.

                                   8. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before

                      the trial Court after completion of one year of custody.


                                                                (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

Anand Kr.

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…