Patna High Court
Vijay PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Paswan, sought anticipatory bail after learning that an FIR filed in 2020 named a "Vijay Paswan, son of Ramji Paswan" as an accused, whereas his father's name is Lakhan Paswan. He argued that the similarity of names led to a case of mistaken identity and that he has no connection to the alleged offences, which include several IPC offences such as assault and robbery. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner is a named accused. The Court, noting the confusion over the father's name, the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of knowledge of the case until 2024, granted anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order directed verification of identity documents, required sureties, and imposed compliance requirements for the trial, while stating that the observations would not affect the trial itself.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite being named in the FIR.
- Whether the alleged confusion of the petitioner's father's name justifies bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of knowledge of the case warrant bail under Section 438 CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mistaken identity
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- Indian Penal Code offences
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11741 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2020 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Vijay Paswan Son of Lakhan Paswan Resident of Village - Charakhari Tola,
Tinanwa, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 245 of 2020 dated
04.05.2020 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 342, 323, 325, 365, 452, 307, 379, 354 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the named
accused persons had forcibly abducted the father of the
informant and thereafter, three persons brutally assaulted the
father of the informant and ran away. It has further been alleged
that one of the persons while fleeing was apprehended who
disclosed his name as Sanjay Paswan and he disclosed the name
of two other persons namely, Vijay Paswan, Son of Ramji
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11741 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
Paswan and one Kameshwar Paswan.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and he was not even aware of any
such case being lodged against him. It has further been
submitted that admittedly, as per the F.I.R., the name of the
accused, Vijay Paswan, son of Ramji Paswan while the
petitioner’s name is Vijay Paswan however, his father name is
Lakhan Paswan. It has further been submitted that the case was
lodged in the year 2020 however, the petitioner got the
knowledge about it in the year 2024 when the police came
looking for him. It has further been submitted that the petitioner
has no concern whatsoever with the said incident, the informant
and others. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has
clean antecedent and he has unnecessarily being dragged in the
present case only on account of confusion of father’s name.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid and taking into account
the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above
named, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11741 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 245 of 2020, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of
BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) It is directed that the bail bond of the petitioner
shall be accepted only after verification of the Aadhar Card and
other documents relating to the parentage of the petitioner along
with the other conditions.
(ii) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(iii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial
and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iv) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner
will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(v) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent
of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the
petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11741 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the
above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in
the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-
U T
Checking your session…