Patna High Court
Yusuf Ali @ Md. YushufversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions.
Summary
Yusuf Ali, the petitioner, was charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for the death of Md. Ayub Khan and applied for regular bail. He asserted that he merely held the victim’s hand while another accused, Tofik, stabbed the victim, and that the incident arose from a land dispute with the informant. The State opposed bail but could not rebut the claim that the petitioner was not the assailant. The court, after considering the petitioner’s clean antecedent and willingness to cooperate, ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, one being his father. The bail was conditioned on the trial court’s power to cancel it if the petitioner attempts to delay the framing of charge or the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite charges under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 103, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner constitute sufficient ground to deny bail
- Whether the land dispute context influences the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103, 109, 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- murder
- assault
- land dispute
- surety
- trial court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87608 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2025 Thana- Gaura P.S. District- Saran
======================================================
Yusuf Ali @ Md. Yushuf Son of Basaruddin Ali Resident of village -
Manjhawali, ps- Gaura,Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Birmani Kumar, Advocate
Santosh Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP
Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 103,
352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 1-7-2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted and from
perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant alleges that on 20-6-2025 at 7 pm, the
accused persons including the petitioner came and petitioner
caught hold the hand of Md. Ayub Khan (brother of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87608 of 2025(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
informant) and accused Tofik indiscriminately stabbed him
leading to his death.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is not alleged to have assaulted the deceased. It is next
submitted that no doubt it is alleged in the FIR that petitioner
caught the hand of the deceased and Tofik stabbed him
indiscriminately, but then the said allegation has been alleged
only to implicate the petitioner in the instant case. It is also
submitted that petitioner and the informant are related and are
having dispute relating to land. It is next submitted that
allegation of stabbing the deceased is against Tofik. It is further
submitted that if petitioner is granted the privilege of regular
bail, petitioner will not abscond rather will co-operate in the
trial to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for bail
of the petitioner, but then are not in a position to rebut the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that on account of dispute relating to land, the
occurrence is alleged to have taken place and petitioner is not
the assailant of the deceased.
6. Considering the submission made by learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87608 of 2025(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Gaura P.S. Case No.
124 of 2025.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
father, Basaruddin.
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial
court comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after his release
is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of
charge is trying to delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial
court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner
after recording reasons.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.