Patna High Court
Md. Saddam @ Md. Sadam @ Mohammad SaddamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that, given the doubtful allegations, the victim’s statement exonerating the petitioner, and his clean antecedent, bail under Section 480(3) of the BNSS was warranted.
Summary
Md. Saddam was arrested in connection with a kidnapping case where the informant alleged his son was abducted and a ransom of Rs. 50,000 was demanded. The victim was later recovered and, in a statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, did not allege any wrongdoing by the petitioner, attributing the dispute to another individual named Piko. The petitioner contended that the case was false, he had no prior criminal record, and the charge sheet had been filed. The State opposed bail, maintaining that the petitioner and co‑accused had indeed abducted the victim. Considering the doubtful nature of the allegation, the victim’s exonerating statement, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the charge sheet, the court granted bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS. The bail order required the petitioner’s presence at court dates and stipulated cancellation upon non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 480(3) of the BNSS in a kidnapping case.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 negates the prima facie case against the petitioner.
- Whether the alleged facts constitute a cognizable offence justifying denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale Act — s. 140(1), 140(2), 140(3), 183, 3(5), 480(3)
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- false accusation
- victim statement
- Section 480(3)
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83347 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2025 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Md. Saddam @ Md. Sadam @ Mohammad Saddam S/O Md. Arifuddin @
Mohammad Arif R/O Gram Fango, Ward No. 6, Phango, P.S. Mansi, District-
Khagaria, Bihar, India
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Shankar Roy, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 195 of 2025, registered for
the offences under Sections 140(1), 140(2), 140(3), 3(5) of the
BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged
that his adult son was abducted by the petitioner and others and
they had been demanding Rs. 50000/-.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence as alleged has
ever taken place. The son of the informant has been recovered
after the matter was first listed before the Coordinate Bench of
this Court and Superintendent of Police, Khagaria was directed
to recover the son of the informant. The statement of the victim
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83347 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
was recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS and from this
statement it is clear that there is no allegation against this
petitioner and whatever allegation is levelled, it is against one
Piko for not making payment after the son of the informant
repaired his motorcycle. It is not believable that on his threat the
victim left his place and went to Delhi and returned after four
months thereafter. Learned counsel further submits that it is an
out and out false case. No one abducted the son of the informant
and only to harass the petitioner and others, the informant has
lodged this false case. The petitioner is in custody since
09.08.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted. Petitioner has
no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State as well as
learned counsel for the informant oppose the submission made
on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant
submits that the petitioner and other coaccused persons
abducted the son of the informant and kept him confined. Only
after police started making raids, he was released by his
abductors.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
improbabale and doubtful nature of allegation and statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83347 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
victim and also considering clean antecedent of this petitioner
and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner is directed to be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC,
Khagaria/concerned court, in connection with Mansi P.S. Case
No. 195 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under
Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on
each and every date fixed by the court
below, if so required by the learned trial
court.
(iii) In case of absence on three
consecutive dates or in violation of the
terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
anuradha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.