Patna High Court
Mahamad Javed @ Mohammad Javed @ Md. JavedversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, as the evidence did not conclusively link him to the informant's death and he possessed a clean antecedent.
Summary
Mahamad Javed was implicated in FIR No.322/2025 for alleged assault and murder of an informant during a land dispute. The prosecution alleged that Javed, along with others, assaulted the informant and seized cash and jewellery, while the defence argued that the informant died of pre‑existing liver disease and that the post‑mortem report was inconclusive. Javed claimed a clean antecedent, highlighted that co‑accused had been granted anticipatory bail, and contended that the only allegation against him was a lathi blow to the informant's left hand, which medical reports did not substantiate. The court examined the lack of direct evidence linking Javed to the informant's death and the medical evidence indicating a natural cause. Considering these factors, the court granted bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC with stringent conditions, including a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the CrPC given the allegations of assault and murder.
- Whether the medical evidence and clean antecedent of the petitioner justify bail despite the FIR charges.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 109, 115, 117, 118, 126(2), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure
- land dispute
- clean antecedent
- post‑mortem
- murder allegation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89065 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2025 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Mahamad Javed @ Mohammad Javed @ Md. Javed S/o Late Jamil Akhtar @
Jamel Akhtar Resident of village- Gannipur Bhejha, P.S.-Sakra, Dist-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Nooren Rahman, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Nooren Rahman, learned counsel for the
informant and Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 322 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
20.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115, 118, 117, 109 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, all the accused
persons including this petitioner over a land dispute brutally
assaulted the informant and his daughter and took away cash
and gold chain from his house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89065 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/5
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The present case is counter blast
of Sakra P.S. Case No. 313 of 2025 which was filed on behalf of
the petitioner. He further submits that both the parties are agnate
to each other and there is dispute over the partition of family
property between the parties. From perusal of the F.I.R it is
apparent that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he
had given a lathi blow on the left hand of the informant due to
which he received injury but the injury report of the injured
person suggest that he has been advised for X-Ray for both
shoulder and no injury is on the left hand of the informant. He
further submits that the informant is suffering from acute liver
disease from much before and he was under treatment at the
Institute of Liver and Biliary Science, New Delhi and he has
been admitted in the said hospital on 20.06.2025 and due to
some complication the informant was advised to move to
AIIMS, New Delhi. On 04.07.2025 he was admitted at AIIMS
and on the same day he expired. It appears from the aforesaid
that the informant died during the course of treatment of liver
infection. No postmortem was conducted at the AIIMS, New
Delhi and the body was handed over to the relative of the
informant. The dead body was brought to Sakra on 05.07.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89065 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/5
and postmortem was conducted at Muzzafarpur. Thus, it is
apparent that the cause of death is liver disorder due to acute
hepatitis but the informant side has painted a picture that the
petitioner has committed murder of the informant. From perusal
of the postmortem report it appears that the cause of death has
not been mentioned in the said report by keeping the opinion
reserved by the doctor and due to this reason, no step has been
taken by the Investigating Officer for adding Section 103 of the
BNS. He further submits that the similarly situated co-accused,
namely, Md. Makbul and Md. Mahfuj have been granted
anticipatory bail vide order dated 14.11.2025 passed in A.B.P.
No. 264 of 2025 by the learned court below itself.
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 there is direct
and specific allegation against the petitioner that he had given
lathi blow on the left hand of the informant due to which he
died.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner has clean antecedent, there is case and counter
case between the parties as well the reports of AIIMS and
Institute of Liver and Biliary Science, New Delhi, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89065 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
4/5
petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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 Additional
Sessions Judge 2nd, Muzaffarpur in connection with Sakra P.S.
Case No. 322 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and
with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89065 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
5/5
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…