Patna High Court
Abu MohammadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Abu Mohammad applied for anticipatory bail in a case where he was implicated based on the confessional statement of a co-accused, Md. Kaif, in a police raid that recovered weapons, live ammunition and narcotics. The prosecution alleged offences under several sections of the IPC, the Arms Act and the NDPS Act, but no incriminating article was found in Abu Mohammad's possession during the search of his house. The petitioner argued that the allegation was unfounded, that he resides in Kolkata, and that the case was filed to harass him. The court examined whether anticipatory bail could be granted when the only link to the petitioner was a co-accused’s confession and no material evidence was recovered from him. Finding the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, the court ordered anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and specific conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The bail is to be surrendered within thirty days of arrest or surrender, with compliance to appearance, non‑tampering with witnesses, and non‑commission of further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the petitioner is implicated solely on the basis of a co‑accused’s confessional statement and no incriminating material is found in his possession.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 35
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 399, 402, 414, 468, 471
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)a, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- possession
- arms seizure
- NDPS
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83596 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2024 Thana- MADHUBANI TOWN District-
Madhubani
======================================================
Abu Mohammad Son of Abdul Barik R/O Village- Ramnagar, Post- Nehra
(Manigachhi), P.S.-Nehra, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kanchan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Madhubani Nagar P.S. Case No.134 of 2024,
F.I.R dated 02.04.2024 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 399, 402, 414, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and
Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)a of the NDPS Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the police received
secret information that some miscreants staying in a rented
house were planning to commit a major offence and had
assembled with arms and ammunition. A police raid was
conducted, during which four accused were apprehended while
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83596 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/4
others fled. The arrested persons were identified as Md. Kaif,
Asif Firoj, Md. Abubakar Siddiki, and Ashraf Ali. During the
search, 694 grams of ganja and several weapons including
knives, an iron punch, an iron sarsi, a hammer, and scoopers
were recovered. Country-made pistols with live cartridges were
seized from Md. Kaif and Ashraf Ali. Mobile phones were also
recovered from the accused. During interrogation, the names of
the absconding accused were disclosed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
name of this petitioner has transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of Md. Kaif (co-accused), who is said to
have been apprehended on the spot. It has next been submitted
that nothing incriminating is said to have been recovered from
the constructive / conscious possession of the petitioner while
his house was searched in his absence. It has further been
submitted that the petitioner is presently engaged in business
and is currently residing at Kolkata and to harass this petitioner,
he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner
has four criminal antecedent relating to Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act and is on bail in all the said cases.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83596 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner’s name has transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused and no incriminating
article is said to have been recovered from the conscious /
constructive possession of the petitioner while his house was
searched in his absence. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to
grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 the learned ADJ V, Madhubani, in connection
with Madhubani Nagar P.S. Case No.134 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83596 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
4/4
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…