Patna High Court
Tahmid @ TamidversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Tahmid, a resident of Purnia district, was arrested on 28 April 2025 in connection with a murder case (PS Case No. 169 of 2025) under Section 103(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, alleging he killed his wife with an iron rod. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was fabricated, asserting the informant was not an eyewitness. The prosecution opposed bail, stating that the petitioner had confessed and that medical evidence corroborated the charge. The court examined the allegations and the supporting medical evidence, finding a direct and specific case against the petitioner. Consequently, the court refused the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case under Section 103(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, given the existence of a confession and medical evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 103(1)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 103
- medical evidence
- confession
- false implication
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81416 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2025 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia
======================================================
Tahmid @ Tamid Son of Md. Mojib @ Birbal Resident of village - Ward No.-
7, Bhawanipur, P.S.- Amour, District - Purnia.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kushal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 31-01-2026 Heard Mr. Kushal, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
28.04.2025 in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 169 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 28.04.2025 for the offences punishable under
Section 103(1) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner killed
his wife who happens to be the informant's daughter by means
of iron rod.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81416 of 2025(3) dt.31-01-2026
2/2
any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the
informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and
merely on the basis of suspicion, petitioner has been made
accused in the present case.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has himself confessed his guilt in the
present occurrence and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is
supported by the medical evidence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner
supported by the medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge
the petitioner on bail in connection with Amour P.S. Case No.
169 of 2025 pending in the court of learned CJM, Purnea.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…