Patna High Court
Md. Kadir @ Md. Qadir @ FirojversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, holding that the material on record does not warrant bail at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Kadir, was charged under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023 for a robbery allegedly committed on 24.10.2024, where two assailants on a motorcycle looted Rs. 1,68,873. The petitioner claims innocence, asserting no recovery of any stolen items from his possession and that he is not named in the FIR, while co-accused have been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing witness statements supporting the prosecution and the petitioner’s strong criminal antecedent. The court, after considering the prosecution’s narrative and the antecedent, declined to grant regular bail, directing that the petitioner may renew the bail application after six months. Consequently, the petitioner remains in custody.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent and the prosecution’s witness testimony justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 309(4)
- BNS 2023
- criminal antecedent
- witness testimony
- robbery
- custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91181 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2024 Thana- FULKAHA District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Kadir @ Md. Qadir @ Firoj Son of Late Md. Gaffar @ Gaffar Miyan
Resident of Village - Jagta Palar Tola, P.S.- Raniganj, District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha
For the State : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned APP for the State.
2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail
in connection with Fulkaha P.S. Case No. 169 of 2024,
registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of
the BNS, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution story, on 24.10.2024, two
unknown persons on a blue Apache motorcycle intercepted the
informant and his colleague at gunpoint near Bhanghi Tola. The
assailants looted Rs. 1,68,873/- and other valuables and fled
away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Nothing has been recovered from
conscious physical possession of the petitioner. He is not named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91181 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/2
in the FIR and other co-accused persons have been granted bail
by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
26.11.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 55583 of 2025. The petitioner is in
custody since 25.07.2025.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Witnesses, in paragraph 11 and 15 of the case diary,
have fully supported the prosecution case and the petitioner has
strong criminal antecedent.
7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, presently, I am not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner. Accordingly, it is rejected.
8. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for
bail after six months.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
priyanka/-
U T
Checking your session…