Patna High Court
Md. Arif @ ArifversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petitioners' anticipatory bail, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Petitioners Md. Arif and Md. Paravej sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Chandauti PS Case No.112 of 2025) alleging offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault with a knife and iron rod. The prosecution alleged that the informant’s grandson and another accused attacked the informant, causing neck injuries. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, pointing out that only one injury from a sharp object was recorded and that the allegations against them were inconsistent, also asserting a family dispute motive. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after considering the submissions and the lack of clear evidence linking the petitioners to the alleged offences, granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The order emphasized that the bail conditions must be complied with and that any breach could lead to cancellation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438(2) of the CrPC in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the evidence, particularly the injury report, sufficiently establishes the petitioners' participation in the alleged offences.
- Whether the alleged offence under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is made out.
- Whether the petitioners' claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedents warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 127(1), 3(5), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- assault
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9678 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Md. Arif @ Arif, S/o- Md. Perwej @ Md. Paravej @ Paravej @ Pravez
Mohalla- Faiz Colony new Aliganj PS- Chandauti District- Gaya
2. Md. Paravej @ Md. Parvez @ Paravej @ Pravez, S/o- Md. Reyajaudin @
Md. Reyajuddin @ Reyajuddin Mohalla- Faiz Colony new Aliganj PS-
Chandauti District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakib Ayaz, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Chandauti P.S. Case No.112 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109 and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the
informant’s grandson and son of the petitioner, Md. Parvej
entered into a quarrel and when the informant went to save his
grandson, the accused Prince, also known as Jeeshan, attacked
on his neck with a knife, and thereafter the other accused
persons attacked with knife and iron rod causing injury on his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9678 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/4
neck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have falsely been implicated. It has further been
submitted that the specific allegation is on Md. Jeeshan to have
attacked with a knife, while there is an allegation of assault by
the petitioners with knife and rod, however, from the perusal of
the injury report, which has been referred to in the impugned
order, it would be evident that there is only one injury found on
Md. Danish that too was caused by sharp object. It has next
been submitted that since there is only one injury by a sharp
object and there is a specific allegation on Md. Jeeshan of
having attacked on the neck with a knife, the allegations against
the petitioner cannot be said to be true. It has next been
submitted that the petitioner no.2 is the brother-in-law of the
informant and on account of some family dispute, this false and
concocted case has been lodged. It has lastly been submitted
that no case under Section 109 of the BNS is made out and the
petitioners have no criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9678 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/4
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Chandauti P.S. Case No.112 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at
liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it
is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However,
the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-
mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9678 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
4/4
in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…