Md. Shadab Haidar @ Shadab Haidar @ Md. Shaab Haidar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 16-04-2026

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶14

learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

¶15

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No.148 of 2025, for allegedly having committed offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 3(5), 74, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to the effect that on 07.10.2025 at about 09:00 a.m., while the informant was at her home, all the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including the petitioners came together and demolished the wall of the informant’s sister-in-law. When the informant screamed, her

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24653 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/3

¶18

sister-in-law along with her brother also came out and they tried to stop them from doing so, then all the accused persons started abusing the informant and other family members and they also assaulted them with fists and sticks.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present case is a counter blast of Morkahi P.S. Case No.147 of 2025, lodged by the petitioner no.1 against the informant and others. It is further submitted that no injury was found on any of the persons, including the informant. It is submitted that the petitioners have got a clean antecedent.

¶20

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it appears that there is case and counter case in between the parties. The petitioner no.1 also lodged an F.I.R. against the informant and the informant also lodged the present case against the petitioners.

¶22

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24653 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 3/3

¶24

of the learned A.C.J.M.-Ist, Khagaria in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No.148 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with a further condition that:-

¶25

The learned court concerned 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 concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶26

(Ritesh Kumar, J)

¶27

Sanjay/-

¶28

U T

Md. Shadab Haidar @ Shadab Haidar @ Md. Shaab Haidar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Shadab Haidar @ Shadab Haidar @ Md. Shaab Haidar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Raut Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Kumar Vs The Union of India

Rohit Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Sahabuddin @ Papu Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Kumar @ Satyam Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar