Patna High Court
Md. ArmanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Petitioners No.1 and No.3 are entitled to anticipatory bail, while petitioner No.2 is denied bail due to his prior criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 285, 293, 132 and 352 of the Bihar Penal Code for allegedly obstructing a state highway during a bandh. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, along with a large group of villagers, blocked the highway, created a commotion and hindered police duties. The petitioners argued that the allegations were vague, omnibus and that they were innocent, pointing out that co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail. The Court noted that petitioner No.2 had two prior criminal antecedents and therefore denied his bail, but held that the general and omnibus nature of the accusation justified granting anticipatory bail to petitioners No.1 and No.3, subject to a bail bond and sureties under Section 482(2). The application was disposed of, with bail directions issued for petitioners 1 and 3.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code given the nature of the allegations under Sections 285, 293, 132 and 352 IPC.
- Whether prior criminal antecedents of a petitioner preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- obstruction of public way
- criminal antecedents
- Section 285 IPC
- Section 352 IPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89906 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2025 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Md. Arman son of Md. Nayin @ Md. Nayeemuddin Resident of Village-
Hardiya (Hardia), Chilmil, Ward No 11, PS- Muffasil, District -Begusarai
2. Md. Manovar @ Md. Manowar Son of Late Abdul Barik Resident of
Village- Hardiya (Hardia), Chilmil, Ward No 11, PS- Muffasil, District
-Begusarai
3. Md. Hanjala @ Mr. Mister @ Mohammad Hanjala son of Md. Abutaliv @
Md. Abutalim Resident of Village- Hardiya (Hardia), Chilmil, Ward No 11,
PS- Muffasil, District -Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 285, 293,
132 and 352 of the B.N.S..
3. As per the prosecution case, on 09.07.2025 at about
06:15 pm, when the police was on patrol duty with armed forces
to maintain law and order during the Bihar Bandh and By-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89906 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/4
Election, 2025, they found that around 40 to 50 villagers had
blocked State Highway, causing obstruction by putting J.C.B.
machines and other vehicles, thereby causing obstruction in
public movement and creating commotion in a violent manner,
causing severe inconvenience to the passengers. It is further
alleged that when the police tried to intervene, the accused
persons created hindrance in discharge of their official duties.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. Petitioners have falsely been
implicated in this case merely on suspicion. Allegation of
assault is general and omnibus and no specific accusation of
overt act has been alleged against these petitioners. Similarly
situated co-accused persons have already been granted the
privilege of anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order
dated 06.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 84276 of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the
F.I.R. with specific accusation that they, along with other F.I.R.
named accused persons and 40 to 50 unknown persons created
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89906 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
3/4
obstruction on the state highway and also created hindrance in
discharge of official duties of the police officials. Petitioner
Nos. 1 and 3 has got one criminal antecedent and Petitioner No.
2 has got two criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and fact that Petitioner No. 2 has got two criminal antecedents,
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 2 is
rejected.
7. So far as Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 are concerned,
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and
omnibus nature of accusation and claim based on parity, the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 is
allowed.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Begusarai in connection with
Muffasil P.S. Case No. 244 of 2025, subject to condition as laid
down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89906 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
4/4
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application
stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…