Patna High Court
Anshu Pandit @ Anshu Kumar Pandey @ Anshu Baba @ Anshu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court’s order, and granted bail to the appellant with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Anshu Pandit, was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act for allegedly being part of a mob that shot a victim who later died. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on the confession of a co‑accused, Bhola Singh, who said the appellant was only present at the scene and did not commit any overt act. The appellant filed an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) against the lower court’s refusal to grant regular bail, contending that the allegations were fabricated and that there was no specific evidence of his participation. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing the appellant’s presence at the incident and his prior criminal antecedents. The Patna High Court held that, in the absence of a specific allegation of assault and given the lack of substantive material linking the appellant to the offence, bail should be granted subject to reasonable conditions, and set aside the lower court’s order.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail despite being present at the scene of the offence and having prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether a charge sheet based primarily on a co‑accused’s confession suffices to deny bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed on bail are appropriate under the applicable statutes.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 14(A)(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act — s. 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Arms Act
- SC/ST Act
- co‑accused confession
- prior criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.518 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2025 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
======================================================
Anshu Pandit @ Anshu Kumar Pandey @ Anshu Baba @ Anshu Kumar S/o
Raj Kishore Pandey @ Raj Kishor Panday R/o vill - Bishunpura
(Bishnupura), P.s- Bihta, Distt.- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajesh Chaudhary S/o Nareh Chaudhary R/o vill - Wajitpur, P.S.- Bihta,
Distt.- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 25-06-2026 Despite valid service of notice upon Respondent
No.2, no one appeared on behalf of Respondent No.2.
2. Heard Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, learned counsel for
the appellant as well as Ms. Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl.P.P. for
the State.
3. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 12.01.2026
passed by the learned Court of Exclusive Special Judge-SC/ST
Act, Civil court, Sadar, Patna in connection with Bihta P.S. Case
No. 348 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 16.05.2025 registered under
Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and
Sections 27 of Arms Act 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.518 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
2/4
Scheduled Tribes Act.
4. According to the prosecution case, some miscreants
fired on the chest and jaw of the brother of informant, due to
which he got injured and later taken for treatment to Netaji
Subhash Chandra Bose Medical College and Hospital, Bihta
where during course of treatment, he died.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in
the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the appellant has not
committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. Initially the
appellant was not named in the FIR and his name transpired on
the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person,
namely, Bhola Singh, who has categorically stated that co-
accused persons, namely, Raja Singh and Priyanshu Singh have
fired upon the victim. He next submits that as per the statement
of Bhola Singh, the appellant was only present at the place of
occurrence and there is no specific allegation of assault or overt
act against him and at best the appellant is the member of the
mob and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has
come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the
appellant in the present case. He further submits that the police,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.518 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
3/4
after investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellant.
The appellant is in custody since 27.12.2025.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and
submits that from bare perusal of the statement of the accused
Bhola Singh, it appears that appellant was present at the place of
occurrence and apart from that, the appellant carries two
criminal antecedents other than the present one.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt
act, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Court of Exclusive Special Judge-SC/ST Act, Civil court, Sadar,
Patna in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 348 of 2025, with
other following conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.518 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
4/4
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.