Parwej Alam @ Prawej Alam Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30114 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran

======================================================

Parwej Alam @ Prawej Alam son of Late Mansoor Alam Resident Of Village -Karah Dargahi Tola Police Station- Baniyapur District -Saran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shambhawi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 07-05-2026

¶11

Heard Ms. Shambhawi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned APP for the State.

¶12

Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.06.2025, in connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 264 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 14.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 127(1), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 103(1), 76, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶13

According to the prosecution case, on 13.06.2025 at about 09:00 P.M., the informant was at home when several named and unknown accused persons arrived armed with lathi, danda, sword and farsa and abused her. When her husband and nephew objected, they were allegedly assaulted with sharp weapons, causing serious injuries. It is further alleged that the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30114 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/4

¶15

informant was outraged and the accused fled on arrival of police. The injured were taken to hospital and the informant’s husband later died during treatment. The alleged motive is prior dispute.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that although the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner and there is specific allegation of assault attributed against co-accused persons, namely, Soaib Khan, Asad Iqbal, Sahnaz Khan, Israfil Khan and Jugnoo Khatoon and for the same set of allegation co-accused person, namely, Aadil Khan @ Aadil Imran and Ejaj Khan @ Md. Ejhad have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 90315 of 2025, another co-accused person, namely, Sahjad Khan @ Shajad Khan has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 81323 of 2025, another co-accused person, namely, Israfil Khan @ Isarafal Khan has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 77971 of 2025 respectively.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30114 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 3/4

¶18

She further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.06.2025.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt against him and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted regular bail or anticipatory bail by this Court as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Saran, Chapra in connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 264 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

¶21

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30114 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 4/4

¶23

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶24

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶26

Ibrar//-

¶27

U T

Parwej Alam @ Prawej Alam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parwej Alam @ Prawej Alam 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Kumar @ Lalan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Somari Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Raushan Kumar @ Roshan Kumar Vs The Special Vigilance Unit through the Superintendent of Police.

Bajrangi Kumar @ Bajarangi Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Arjun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar