Patna High Court
Aadil khan @ Aadil imranversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, finding no specific allegations against them and invoking the provisions of Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Aadil Khan and Ejaj Khan, were alleged members of a mob that assaulted an informant's family on 13 June 2025, resulting in serious injuries and the death of the informant's husband. The FIR listed numerous offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, but the prosecution had not made specific allegations against the petitioners, only naming other accused. The petitioners filed an anticipatory bail application, arguing that they were merely part of a larger group and citing a similar bail order granted to another accused. The State opposed the bail, but the Court noted the lack of specific charges against the petitioners and the principle of granting bail in the absence of concrete evidence. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners alleged to be members of a mob when no specific allegations are made against them
- Whether the provisions of Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita are applicable in this case
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 127(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mob assault
- FIR
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 438
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90315 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Aadil khan @ Aadil imran son of Idat Ali Resident Of Village -Dargahi Tola
Police Station -Baniyapur District- Saran
2. Ejaj Khan @ Md. Ejhad son of Hardan Khan Resident Of Village -Dargahi
Tola Police Station -Baniyapur District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mili Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehended his arrest in
connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 264 of 2025, F.I.R
dated 14.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 127(1), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2),
109, 103(1), 76, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 13.06.2025 at
about 9:00 P.M., the informant was at home when several
named and unknown accused persons arrived armed with lathi,
danda, sword and farsa and abused her. When her husband and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90315 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
nephew objected, they were allegedly assaulted with sharp
weapons, causing serious injuries. It is further alleged that the
informant was outraged and the accused fled on arrival of
police. The injured were taken to hospital, and the informant’s
husband later died during treatment. The alleged motive is prior
dispute.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners involvement in the instant case has been only shown
to be a member of mob, whereas, there is nothing specific
allegations against this petitioner, and the specific allegations of
overact is against Shjoaib Khan, Asad Iqbal, Sahnaz Khan,
Irafil Khan & Jugnoo Khatoon, who are said to have caused
injury to the husband of the informant with lathi, danda sward
& farsa. It has next been submitted that the F.I.R is against 40
persons out of which 20 persons are named with specific
allegations, whereas 20 unknown persons is also implicated. It
has next been submitted that similarly situated persons, namely,
Anamul Haque against whom the similar allegations have
levelled has already been extended the benefit of anticipatory
bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90315 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
the petitioners are said to be member of mob, while there is no
specific allegations against these petitioners. Accordingly, this
Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the
petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of
his/her 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 J.M. 1st Class, Saran at Chapra in
connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 264 of 2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90315 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
U T
Checking your session…