Patna High Court
Mohammad Danish @ Mohammad ArshadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Bail was allowed because the petitioner was not the assailant, no specific overt act was attributed to him, similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail, and he had been in custody since 21.05.2025.
Summary
The petitioner Mohammad Danish @ Mohammad Arshad sought bail in Durgawati P.S. Case No. 150 of 2025 registered under Sections 109, 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the informant's son Tarkeshwar Paswan was shot dead at Khajura Bazar when occupants of a Baleno car, including the petitioner, opened indiscriminate fire, and that co-accused Md. Nehal shot the deceased while Krishna Paswan was injured. The petitioner argued that he was innocent, that the specific allegation of firing was against Md. Nehal, that he was merely sitting in the car with no overt act, and that the eyewitnesses did not name him as the assailant. He also relied on parity with co-accused who had been granted bail and on his custody since 21.05.2025 and the submission of the charge-sheet. The State opposed the bail prayer. The High Court considered the facts, the petitioner's non-assailant role, parity, and custody period, and allowed the bail prayer. The petitioner was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kaimur at Bhabhua.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case under Sections 109, 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether mere presence in the car without a specific overt act and the absence of naming by eyewitnesses justifies grant of bail.
- Whether parity with co-accused granted bail and the period of custody support grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 109, 3(5)
Subjects
- Bail
- Murder
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Parity
- No overt act
- Custody
- Charge-sheet
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79969 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Mohammad Danish @ Mohammad Arshad S/o Muhammad Munna @ Md.
Munna R/o Village - Ishapur, Mudia Tola (Murgiya Tola), Phulwarisharif, P.S
- Phulwarisharif, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Advocate
Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 109, 103 and 3(5) of the
B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant’s
elder son, namely Tarkeshwar Paswan, went to Khajura Bazar
with Krishna Paswan and Rishikesh Paswan. After sometime,
informant came to know that there was firing at Khajura Bazar
and when the informant reached there, he saw his son was lying
dead and blood was oozing from his head, leg and hand. Upon
inquiry, Rishikesh Paswan told him that one Baleno Car having
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79969 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
Reg. No. BR06CN-6987 came there in which five persons,
namely Md. Danish (petitioner), Md. Nehal, Santosh Kumar,
Afroz and Saheb Paswan, were seated and they made
indiscriminate firing. Md. Nehal shot Tarkeshwar and in course
of rescue Krishna Paswan got injured.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. From
bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that specific accusation
of causing fire arm injury is against co-accused Md. Nehal. So
far as this petitioner is concerned, he is only alleged to have
been seating in the car and no specific accusation of overt act
has been alleged against him. Even during course of
investigation, Rishikesh Paswan and Krishna Paswan, who were
present at the place of occurrence with the deceased and Krishna
Paswan also got injured in the occurrence, did not name this
petitioner as the assailant of the deceased. It is further submitted
that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been
granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 18.11.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74478 of 2025 and order dated
26.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 81051 of 2025. Moreover,
charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner is in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79969 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
custody since 21.05.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, fact that petitioner is not the assailant of the deceased,
claim based on parity and period of custody, the prayer for grant
of bail to the petitioner is allowed.
7. Accordingly, let the above named petitioner 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kaimur at
Bhabhua in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 150 of
2025.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…