Md Shahid Ibrahimi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35271 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== Md Shahid Ibrahimi S/o Md Kalimuddin @ Kalimuddin Resident of VillAriyari PS- Ariyari Dist- Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh, A.P.P.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103 (1) and 3 (5) of BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant namely, Neelam devi alleged that on 15.02.2025, her husband went outside and later on she got an information that her husband was murdered by gunshot. It is further alleged that due to prior dispute, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including this petitioner conspired and committed murder of her husband.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that from perusal of F.I.R. it is apparent that informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence. Only suspicion has been raised against him. During course of investigation, informant has only alleged that this petitioner along with other named accused persons were seen fleeing from the place of occurrence and none of the witnesses claimed to have seen this petitioner committing the alleged occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35271 of 2025(6) dt.05-02-2026 2/2
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the informant oppose the bail application. Learned counsel for the informant submits that apart from the allegations made in the FIR and materials collected during investigation, petitioner has got nine criminal antecedents, out which some of them are of similar nature.
6. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation as well as the fact that the petitioner has got nine criminal antecedents, his prayer for bail is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T