Abdul Barik v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3167 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2024 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== Abdul Barik Son of Nurul Islam R/o Chhota Lakhanpur, P.S. - Amdabad, Distt.- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Murli Dhar, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate :
Mr. Prabhojat Singh, Advocate :
Mr. Mohit Ranjan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 15.05.2025 in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323,324,307,302, 504, 506, 34 and 120(B) of IPC.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that due to land dispute all of the named accused persons came at the house of the informant and started to abuse and assault the informant and his family members. One Abdul Bark nabbed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3167 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026 2/3 a knife on the back of Rabiul Alam, Faruk Alam assaulted on his head, Md. Sharif pulled the knife, then after his brother died on spot. All of the accused persons assaulted the informant on his thumb of left hand by means of lathi for which he sustained injury. One Mojibur Rahman and Mahboob Alam assaulted to one Asfaque Alam, Mahfooz Alam and Abdulla Wahid, for which they also get injured. The local persons came forward then all of the accused persons fled away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that due to village politics the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR it appears that there is two specific allegation against the petitioner and deceased has died on the spot. It is next submitted that there is specific allegation of assault by means of knife upon the deceased. Apart from aforesaid, petitioner has antecedent of two cases other than the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3167 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026 3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 484 of 2024 arising out of Amdabad P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024 pending in the court of learned District and Additional District & Sessions Judge-I, Katihar.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T