Tayazuddin @ Teyazuddin Sheikh Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88260 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2025 Thana- MAINATAND District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Tayazuddin @ Teyazuddin Sheikh S/o Sk. Sufiyan R/o Village - Purainiya, P.S - Mainatand, District - West Champaran.

¶5

Versus

¶6

2 12-01-2026

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Krishna Kant Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶10

A.P.P. for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

¶12

Mainatand P.S. Case No. 75/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 118, 126(2), 74, 109(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of B.N.S.

¶13

As per prosecution case, there is allegation against the petitioner who is said to have assaulted the informant’s husband by means of spear on the hand. It is further alleged that the petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant’s daughter by means of spear on the leg as a result of which she sustained leg injury.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88260 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 2/4

¶16

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 14.10.2025 and bears one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. There is no intention to kill the informant’s husband and daughter rather the allegation of assaulting on the hand of the informant’s husband has not been corroborated by the injury report as mentioned in the impugned order. He further submits that there is only one allegation against the petitioner who is said to have assaulted the informant’s daughter and the injury is incised wound on the lower leg. The dispute arose on the simple matter where the petitioner and others were in queue for the purpose of getting Adhar card and during course of getting Adhar card some scuffle has taken place and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He orally submits that charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no offence is made out against the petitioner under Section 109(1) of B.N.S. Co-accused Sheikh Zakir and Md. Hasantaz against whom there is specific allegation, have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No.44103/2025 and the case of present petitioner stands on

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88260 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 3/4

¶18

better footing.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and the same is corroborated by the injury report and hence, the petitioner does not deserve bail.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, co-accused have already been granted bail, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 75/2025, subject to following conditions:-

¶21

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶22

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88260 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 4/4

¶24

cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶25

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

¶26

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

¶27

for cancellation of bail.

¶28

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)