Md. Ahtesham Alam @ Sonu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15402 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2025 Thana- TARIYANI CHAPRA PS DistrictSheohar ====================================================== Md. Ahtesham Alam @ Sonu, S/o Md. Muzaffar Alam, R/o Village - Khortha, Ward No. 12, P.S - Belsand, District - Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Verma, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate Mr. Vishal Kumar, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Aryans, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Tariyani Chhapra P.S. Case No. 104 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that unknown miscreants have killed the husband of the informant who was a rural medical practitioner.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15402 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026 2/3 case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during course of investigation, the name of this petitioner has surfaced in para 59 of the case diary, where spy has disclosed that there was rivalry between the petitioner and the deceased as both were in same profession and the deceased was emerging as good professional in that area. It has further been submitted that police has also extracted confessional statement of the petitioner. Save and except the confessional statement, there is nothing against him. Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 22.12.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that on the disclosure of this petitioner, the weapon of assault was recovered. It has further been submitted that during investigation, certain witnesses have seen the petitioner fleeing from the place of occurrence. In confessional statement, this petitioner has stated that he has stabbed the deceased many times which is corroborated by the postmortem report.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15402 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026 3/3

7. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T