Patna High Court

Md. Babar Mian @ Babar MianversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 January 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Babar Mian, was implicated in FIR No. 114 of 2025 for multiple offences under the BNS, 2023, including assault with deadly weapons and attempts to outrage modesty. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, attacked the informant and his brother, causing grievous injuries, and highlighted his prior criminal antecedents. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated due to a land dispute and that there was no intention to kill. The informant’s counsel and the Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, emphasizing the specific allegations of assault and the seriousness of the injuries. The Court, after considering the facts, declined to grant anticipatory bail, refusing the petitioner's prayer.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the allegations of assault, grievous injury, and prior criminal antecedents
Whether the absence of an intention to kill negates the necessity for anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

BNS, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76

Subjects

anticipatory bail
assault
grievous injury
criminal antecedents
land dispute
bail refusal

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88333 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- GARHI District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Babar Mian @ Babar Mian S/O Ialayas @ Ismayil R/O Vill.- Purani
                 Jhiktti, P.O.- Baribag, P.S.- Garhi, Dist.- Jamui, - 811317
                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Rahul Mani, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-01-2026                        Heard Mr. Rahul Mani, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner, Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the

                   informant as well as Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, learned APP for

                   the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Garhi P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025, F.I.R. dated

                   22.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 118(1), 329(3), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 109(1) and 3(5)

                   of the BNS, 2023.

                                3.   According to prosecution case, all the accused

                   persons including this petitioner armed with iron rod, sword and

                   other deadly weapons brutally assaulted the informant and his

                   brother and also tried to outrage the modesty of the informant's

                   niece.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88333 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

                      present case due to admitted land dispute between the parties.

                      He further submits that although there is direct and specific

                      allegation of assault against the petitioner but there is no

                      intention to kill anyone.

                                  5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned

                      Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the

                      prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from

                      the F.I.R that there is direct and specific allegation against the

                      petitioner that he has assaulted the brother of the informant

                      namely, Shamim by means of sword due to which he received

                      three injuries and out of these three injuries, one injury is

                      grievous in nature and apart from that the petitioner carries two

                      criminal antecedents other than the present one.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                      I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner in connection with Garhi P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025

                      pending in the court of J.M. 1st Class, Jamui.

                                   7. Prayer is refused.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…