Md. Obaid vs The State Of Bihar on 13 August, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Md. Obaid vs The State Of Bihar on 13 August, 2025

Author: Alok Kumar Sinha

Bench: Alok Kumar Sinha

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39675 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2025 Thana- VAINI District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Md. Obaid Son of Md. Basir Village- chandauli, Ps- Wainy, Dist- Samastipur
           2.    Md. Kalam Son of Md. Samsul Haque Village- chandauli, Ps- Wainy, Dist-
                 Samastipur
           3.     Md. Islam Son of Md. Samsul Haque Village- chandauli, Ps- Wainy, Dist-
                  Samastipur
                                                                          ... ... Petitioners
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Yogendra Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER
3   13-08-2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Wainy

P.S. Case No. 26 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 109(1), 351(2), 352,

303(3), 3(5) of the BNS.

3. The petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent.

He is an accused in Tajpur P.S. Case No. 89 of 2024 under

Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 354, 379, 504 and 506 of the

Indian Penal Code. Petitioner no. 2 has no criminal antecedent

and petitioner no. 3 has two criminal antecedents, he is an

accused in Tajpur P.S. Case No. 433 of 2022 under Sections 341,

323, 324, 447, 354, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Code and also in C.R. Case No. 1525 of 2022 under Sections

323, 342, 452, 354(B), 307, 380, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39675 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025
2/4

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the

informant stated in his fardbeyan that on 30.03.2025 at about

09:00 PM when he was at his home, the petitioners and others

came with deadly armed weapons and started construction over

the disputed land and on protest they started abusing him and

assaulted by iron rod over his head and when other family

members came to rescue then they were also assaulted.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the

present case on the basis of the previously existing land dispute

between the two families. He submits that the petitioners are in

custody since 31.03.2025 and charge-sheet against all the three

petitioners have already been filed, thereby completing the

investigation. He, therefore, submits that prolong custody of the

petitioners is not required in the present case.

6. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the

State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioners.

7. Upon consideration of the materials on record

particularly the Case Diary and the Injury Report it transpires

that the assault committed by petitioner nos. 2 & 3 have resulted

in simple injury whereas assault done by petitioner no. 1 i.e.,

Md. Obaid has resulted in grievous injury. Petitioner no. 1 has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39675 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025
3/4

also one criminal antecedent but petitioner no. 2 does not have

any criminal antecedent. Petitioner no. 3 has two criminal

antecedents as disclosed in paragraph-3 of this bail application.

8. Considering these circumstances, the Court is not

inclined to grant bail to petitioner no. 1 namely, Md. Obaid,

hence his prayer for bail is rejected but considering the fact that

the assault made by petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have resulted in very

simple injury and they have already remained in custody since

31.03.2025, the Court is inclined to grant bail to petitioner nos.

2 and 3.

9. Accordingly, the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 above

named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing

bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees 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 Wainy P.S. Case No. 26 of 2025,

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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39675 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025
4/4

without substantial reason 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 his 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

petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the

above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in

the name of verification.

10. The prayer for grant of bail of petitioner no. 1

stands rejected.

11. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is partly allowed.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T