Patna High Court

Shamim AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SHAILENDRA SINGH

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Shamim Alam applied for regular bail in a case registered under sections 61(2) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 27 of the Arms Act. He contended that he was not named in the FIR and was only a friend of the accused Samsun Johar, whose brother (the informant) had a land dispute with him, leading to false implication. The informant could not identify Alam as an assailant during trial and had entered into a compromise with his brother, as evidenced by a deposition annexed to the petition. The State opposed the bail but failed to rebut these submissions. Considering the lack of identification by the main witness and the circumstances of false implication, the Court ordered Alam's release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner given the lack of identification by the main witness and alleged false implication.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 61(2)

Subjects

regular bail
false implication
informant
land dispute
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Arms Act
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90210 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-365 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
                                                       Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Shamim Alam, son of Hasan Imam, Resident of Village- Bhojpurwa, Police
                 Station -Manjhagarh District- Gopalganj                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms. Mili Kumari, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-01-2026                      Heard the parties.

                                2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 365 of 2025 registered for the

                   offences punishable under sections 61(2) and 109 of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner’s

                   counsel are that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and he is a

                   friend of the FIR named accused Samsun Johar, who is full

                   brother of the informant and a land dispute is running in between

                   the informant and his brother, due to which the petitioner has

                   been falsely implicated in the present matter. It is further

                   submitted that the informant could not identify the petitioner as a

                   member of assailants during the trial and the certified copy of his

                   deposition is annexed with this petition as Annexure - ‘P/2’ and

                   the same may be perused and the informant has entered into a

                   compromise with his full brother Samsun Johar and the petitioner
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90210 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       has been languishing in jail since 17.05.2025.

                                    4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of

                       the petitioner but has not been able to refute the aforesaid

                       submissions made by petitioner’s counsel.

                                    5. Considering the above submissions, the averments

                       made in this application and the petitioner’s plea that before the

                       trial court the informant, who is said to be the main witness of

                       the prosecution, could not be able to identify the petitioner as

                       being the assailant and also taking into consideration the fact that

                       in the FIR the informant raised suspicion only against his brother

                       Samsun Johar on account of a land dispute running in between

                       them, coupled with petitioner’s custody period, this Court is

                       inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner

                       named-above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

                       20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like

                       amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in

                       connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 365 of 2025.



                                                 (Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…