← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15259/2026bail granted

Ekbal Ali @ Ekbal Ahmad @ Iqbal v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-23Mr. Justice Praveen Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15259 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2025 Thana- SRIPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Ekbal Ali @ Ekbal Ahmad @ Iqbal Son of Abrar Ali @ Mohamad Abrar Husain Resident of Village - Algatpur, P.S.- Sripur (Shripur), (Phulwariya), District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sripur P.S. Case No. 229 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(2), 61(2) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, it has been alleged that on 21.09.2025, a fight occurred between two groups. Consequently, few boys were roaming around the public markets looking for the Gopalpur boys. It has been alleged that around 3:30 p.m., the informant son, namely, Faisal Ahmed went to Janta Bazar with his friend where one Amiruddin and Asif got identified Faisal from Gopalpur to other boys. It is

2/4 alleged that Saif, Mudassir, Rehan, Mehboob, Iqbal(petitioner), Yusuf, Adil, Kamran, and Sajid then attacked Faisal. It has been specifically alleged that Saif, Mudassir, Mehboob and Iqbal (petitioner) with intention to kill stabbed Faisal, efforts were taken to take him to the hospital but before reaching to the hospital Faisal died. It has been alleged that the occurrence took place in front of the tea stall one by Imran.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the statement of tea shop owner Md. Imran has been recorded in para 5 of the case diary and he has stated that during the intervening fight between the two groups one person wearing a red t-shirt stabbed the deceased, thereafter, other persons fled away from there. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the intention of this court to the statement of witness Wasim Raja as recorded in paragraph 13 of the case diary in which he has stated that during the intervening fights, coaccused Saif Ali assaulted by means of knife on shoulder and abdomen of Faisal. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this court to the post mortem report wherein the autopsy surgeon has opined two injuries one on left

3/4 scapula and one on intestine, on the person of deceased Faisal which corroborates the statement of the witness namely, Imran the tea shop owner as well as the statement of Wasim Raja as recorded in para 31. It has further been submitted that chargesheet has been submitted in the case and there is no allegation of tampering and petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the trial. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 07.10.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstance of the case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged 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 Court concerned, Additional Chief Judicial MagistrateXIV, Gopalganj in connection with Sripur P.S. Case No. 229 of 2025.

7. The petitioner is directed to co-operate in the trial and be well represented on each and every date fixed in the trial and failure to appear on two consecutive dates, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

4/4

8. It is further directed that petitioner would not tamper with the evidence and if such allegations are made and if the petitioner indulges himself in tampering of the evidence, the prosecution will be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of bail bonds.

9. The application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar, J) niku/- U T