Patna High Court
Naim @ Md. Naim @ Md. NaimeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Bail may be granted only if the trial of all accused is conducted simultaneously, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs 30,000 and compliance with the BNSS conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Naim, applied for regular bail in a Sessions trial involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act. His earlier bail application had been rejected, while bail had been granted to two co‑accused on the condition that they be enlarged on bail after charge framing. The court examined whether the trial of all three accused was being conducted simultaneously, a prerequisite for granting bail under Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023. It noted that charge was framed against the petitioner on 30‑08‑2025, but the report did not clearly show simultaneous trial of the other two accused. Consequently, the court held that bail could be directed only if the trial of all accused proceeds simultaneously, subject to a bail bond of Rs 30,000 and compliance with Section 480(3) of the BNSS. In the absence of such confirmation, the bail application was not granted.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the petitioner under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act.
- Whether the trial of all accused persons is being conducted simultaneously, as required by Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 480(3) of the BNSS, 2023 are satisfied for bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 2(1)(d), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 480(3)
Subjects
- regular bail
- simultaneous trial
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- BNSS
- bail bond
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 83892 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2025 Thana- MANIHARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Naim @ Md. Naim @ Md. Naime Son of Md. Shakur @ Shakko Sabji Faros
Resident of Village- Balu tola, Nawabganj, Dist- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Naraian, Senior Advocate
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 534 of 2025 arising out of Manihari P.S. Case
No. 02 of 2025, lodged on 04.01.2025, under Sections 115(2),
126(2), 109, 352, 351(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected
vide order dated 02.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34288 of
2025. He further submits that other accused persons, against
whom specific allegations have been made, have been granted
bail by the Sessions Court itself, a copy of which has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 83892 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/3
annexed as Annexure-3 series.
4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail and submits that a report regarding the present stage of trial
was called for.
5. It transpires to this Court that the bail applications
of Kumod Kumar Yadav @ Jagga Yadav and Md. Umar Faruque
@ Md. Sheru were granted vide order dated 22.07.2025 by the
Court of District & Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Katihar, in Bail
Petition No. 581 of 2025 and Bail Petition No. 582 of 2025, on
the condition that they shall be enlarged on bail after framing of
charge. However, from the report dated 24.01.2026, it transpires
that charge has been framed against the present accused only on
30.08.2025, implying that either no charge has been framed
against the two other accused persons, or if framed, it has been
done separately.
6. In response thereto, counsel on record specifically
submits that all three accused persons, namely, Kumod Kumar
Yadav @ Jagga Yadav, Md. Umar Faruque @ Md. Sheru, and
Naim @ Md. Naim @ Md. Naime (petitioner), are facing trial
simultaneously.
7. Nevertheless, from the report, it does not so
transpire to this Court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 83892 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/3
8. Subject to the above, in any view of the matter, if
the trial of all the accused persons mentioned above is going on
simultaneously, only in that case the petitioner shall be directed
to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 30,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of
the BNSS, 2023, to the satisfaction of the District & Additional
Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, Katihar, in connection
with Sessions Trial No. 534 of 2025 arising out of Manihari P.S.
Case No. 02 of 2025, subject to the following conditions as laid
down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…