Patna High Court
Shyam Sundar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, as they have a prima facie case and clean antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Shyam Sundar Kumar and Hardev Mahto, were implicated in FIR No. 230 of 2025 under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, for alleged assault, robbery and threats during a land dispute. They contended that the allegations were false, arising as a counter‑blast to an earlier case (Motipur P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025), and that they have clean antecedents. The State opposed their request for pre‑arrest bail. The High Court examined the nature of the allegations, the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case scenario, and the petitioners' clean record, and concluded that they had made out a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the Court directed the District Court to grant anticipatory bail on surrender, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNS. The order also required verification of any pending criminal cases against the petitioners, with automatic lapse if such cases exist.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory/pre‑arrest bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the allegations being general and arising from a land dispute constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedents and the counter‑blast nature of the case justify grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 191(2), 303(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- land dispute
- false implication
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- clean antecedents
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10764 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Shyam Sundar Kumar Son of Laldev Mahto R/o Boariya North, P.O. and
P.S.- Motipur, District - Muzaffarpur, State - Bihar.
2. Hardev Mahto Wife of Late Jangali Mahto R/o Boariya North, P.O. and P.S.-
Motipur, District - Muzaffarpur, State - Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhigyan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Abhigyan Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Dilip Kumar No.
1, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Motipur P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025 registered under
Sections191(2),329(3),126(2),115(2),118(1),351(2),352,303(2),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the accused
persons, including the petitioners, armed with deadly weapons,
allegedly came to the informant’s house, abused and assaulted
him and his family members causing injuries, and further
trespassed into the house to commit loot of cash and jewellery
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10764 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
while issuing threats, leading to institution of the FIR.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners
submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have falsely
been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted
that there is case and counter case between the parties and the
present case is a counterblast to Motipur P.S. Case No. 218 of
2025 (Annexure P/2). The allegations are general and omnibus
in nature. The present case is arising out of a land dispute. The
petitioners have clean antecedents. On these grounds, the
petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties and upon perusal of the materials on record, it
appears that there is a case and counter-case between the parties
and the present case is a counterblast to Motipur P.S. Case No.
218 of 2025. The allegations against the petitioners are general
and omnibus in nature and the dispute appears to arise out of a
land dispute. Considering the clean antecedents of the
petitioners, I am of the opinion that the petitioners have, prima
facie, made out a case for grant of pre-arrest bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10764 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
petitioners on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending
in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025 , subject
to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…