Patna High Court
Mohammad Idrish @ Md. Idris AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted to the petitioners, subject to conditions, as they have no criminal antecedent and are willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Summary
The petitioners, Mohammad Idrish, Zubeida Khatun and Dilshad Saba, sought bail after being implicated in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly assaulting an informant, his granddaughter and daughter‑in‑law, and stealing a gold chain. They contended that the incident arose from a long‑standing land dispute and was a "free fight" with no criminal intent, emphasizing their lack of prior criminal record and willingness to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the court granted bail, directing the petitioners to surrender within six weeks and furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order reflects the court’s view that the circumstances do not warrant continued detention. The bail order was issued by Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra of the Patna High Court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita despite the serious nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the allegations of assault and theft constitute grounds for denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioners' claim of a land‑dispute‑related free fight and lack of criminal antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 74
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79428 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2025 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia
======================================================
1. Mohammad Idrish @ Md. Idris Ansari S/O Late Amiruddin R/O Vill and
Post.- Kukron Amari, P.S.- Dhamdaha, Dist.- Purnia- 854205, Bihar
2. Zubeida Khatun W/O Mohd. Idrish R/O Vill and Post.- Kukron Amari, P.S.-
Dhamdaha, Dist.- Purnia- 854205, Bihar
3. Dilshad Saba S/O Mohd. Idrish R/O Vill and Post.- Kukron Amari, P.S.-
Dhamdaha, Dist.- Purnia- 854205, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1),
109, 117(2) and 74 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per prosecution case, all the accused persons
including the petitioners assaulted the informant with sticks and
rods when he was plucking drumsticks. It is further alleged that
the accused persons also assaulted the informant’s
granddaughter and daughter-in-law, snatched her gold chain and
abused them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
present case.. Further submission is that due to long standing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79428 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/2
land dispute between the parties, a free fight took place between
them in which both sides sustained injuries. There is case and
counter case between the parties. Petitioner no. 1 is aged about
72 years old, petitioner no. 2 is aged about 69 years old and
petitioner no. 3 is a young boy of 22 years old. Petitioners have
no criminal antecedent. They undertake to cooperate in the
investigation and trial.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State
opposed the bail application.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances
of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties,
let the above named petitioners be released on bail, in the event
of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a
period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Purnea in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No.
94 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
utkarsh/-
U T
Checking your session…