Patna High Court
Bittu Dome @ Anuj RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the case is a fit one for anticipatory bail and granted it to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, five young men from Gaya district, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No. 264 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS. They contended that the FIR indicated a spontaneous quarrel, with only a minor injury to the informant, and that the alleged assault was not pre‑planned. They also highlighted the lack of specific allegations against them in the FIR and the clean record of petitioner No.1, while noting that the others had pending cases but were out on bail. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, considering the youthful age of some petitioners, the nature of the injury, and the absence of a clear pre‑meditated plan, held that the circumstances warranted anticipatory bail and ordered release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties each, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the facts disclosed in the FIR justify denial of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
- Whether the alleged assault, being unplanned and resulting in only minor injury, merits the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners' age and prior criminal antecedents affect the decision on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Penal Code (BNS) — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- Section 482
- Bihar
- high court
- pre‑planned assault
- minor injury
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11086 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Bittu Dome @ Anuj Ram, S/O Munna Dome @ Munna Ram R/O
Gewalbigha Domtoli, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gaya
2. Munna Dome @ Munna Ram, S/O Sumitri R/O Gewalbigha Domtoli, P.S.-
Rampur, District- Gaya
3. Vishal Dome @ Vishal Kumar, S/O Munna Ram @ Munna Dome R/O
Gewalbigha Domtoli, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gaya
4. Rahul Dome @ Rahul Kumar, S/O Bihari Dome @ Binod Dome R/O
Gewalbigha Domtoli, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gaya
5. Mukhiya Dome @ Mukesh Dome, S/O Mohan Dome R/O Gewalbigha
Domtoli, P.S.- Rampur, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in
connection with Rampur P. S. Case No. 264 of 2025 registered
for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2),
109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. The main submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the petitioners are that the FIR itself shows that the
alleged occurrence was not pre-planned and the same is said to
have taken place on account of a quarrel in between the children
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11086 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
and further on the head of the informant only one injury was
found while as per the FIR five accused who are here
petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the informant by means
of rod and danda. It is further submitted that among the
petitioners, petitioner no. 1 has no criminal antecedent and
against the petitioner nos. 2, and 3 there is a criminal antecedent
of one case and against the petitioner nos. 4 and 5 there is also
one criminal antecedent but they are on bail in those cases.
4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed
the bail prayer of the petitioners.
5. In the facts and circumstances of this case and
considering the aforesaid submissions, the pleas taken by the
petitioners in their petition, mainly the young age of petitioner
nos. 1, 3 and 4 coupled with this fact that against the petitioners
there is no specific allegation in the FIR and the injury found on
the person of the informant has been opined to be simple in
nature and the alleged occurrence is not said to have taken place
in a planned manner, in my opinion, it is a fit case for
anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, let the
petitioners named-above, in the event of their arrest/surrender
before the learned court below within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11086 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
Rampur P. S. Case No. 264 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Rajiv/-
U T
Checking your session…