SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3074

PATNA HIGH COURT
Jitendra Kumar, J
Md. Meraj Alam @ Md. Meraj @ Meraj – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80509 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Gyan Prakash
For the Respondents: Md. Fahimuddin, APP

A bail application can be granted if the petitioner demonstrates both innocence and no substantial evidence against them while fulfilling conditions set by the court.

Headnote:This case pertains to a bail application in connection with Kalibagh P.S. Case No. 156 of 2025, under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023. The petitioner contends innocence, alleging false implication, with arguments about lack of incriminating evidence against him. The court, after considering the circumstances, granted bail subject to specific conditions. It emphasized the need for cooperation in the investigation while ensuring prior criminal antecedents are disclosed.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kalibagh P.S. Case No. 156 of 2025 dated 14.06.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and

3(5) of B.N.S. , 2023.

3. As per allegation, the husband of the informant lady has been seriously injured by a sharp edged weapon and after he being taken to the hospital, he was declared dead. The informant wife has expressed suspicion about the involvement of the friend of her son, who has association with criminal friends.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that FIR has been lodged against unknown persons and even during the course of investigation, no incriminating material has been recovered from him. The incriminating material has been recovered from co-accused, Salim Akhtar and Sheikh Shamsad and only material against the petitioner is the so-called confessional statement of co-accused to the police, which has no evidentiary value. He further submits that the investigation is already completed and not only charge- sheet has been submitted in this case, but even charge has been framed against the accused persons.

5. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 17.06.2025.

6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has earlier been made accused in two other cases.

7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.

8. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.

9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above- named, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court below in connection with Kalibagh P.S. Case No. 156 of 2025 on the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required.

(ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required.

(iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has criminal antecedents other than the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.

(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Jitendra Kumar, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top