Md Pravej Alam @ Parvej Alam Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3088 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2025 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna

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

Md Pravej Alam @ Parvej Alam Son of Anwarul Haque Resident of Village - Sakri, P.S.- Sakri, District - Madhubani, Presently Residing at Village - Subhan (Sibotar), P.S.- Sikri (Sakari), District - Darbhanga

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr.Amit Anand, Advocate For the State : Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 12-05-2026

¶9

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and

¶10

learned APP for the State.

¶11

This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 87 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶12

Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 38847 of 2025.

¶13

As per the prosecution case, a looted truck has been recovered from the petitioner, which was given to him for painting etc.

¶14

The petitioner is in custody since 09.03.2025

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3088 of 2026(3) dt.12-05-2026 2/3

¶16

having no criminal antecedent.

¶17

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been found to be involved in the main crime of loot of a truck. Bipin Kumar, Nitish Kumar, Kundan Kumar and Rikky Kumar are the persons who are involved in the loot of the truck and the truck was given to the petitioner for painting. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner could not have known that the truck was a looted one and he being a painter is unnecessarily lying in custody since 09.03.2025. The trial has also not begun.

¶18

Considering the period of custody and also the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the petitioner is a mere painter, this application is allowed.

¶19

Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-VI, Danapur/ concerned Court below in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 87 of 2025.

¶20

After being released on bail, the petitioner is directed to cooperate in the trial by appearing personally till the framing of charge and after framing of charge he is directed to cooperate in the trial either by appearing personally or through

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3088 of 2026(3) dt.12-05-2026 3/3

¶22

his lawyer. Non-compliance of the condition will result in cancellation of the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶23

It is, however, clarified that the observations made

¶24

herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶25

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶26

P. Kumar

¶27

U T

Md Pravej Alam @ Parvej Alam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Pravej Alam @ Parvej 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shravan Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Immamuddin Miyan @ Golu Vs The State of Bihar

Laltu Kumar @ Chintu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ashif Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Tuntun Bind Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Mahto @ Munna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar