Patna High Court
Satyanarayan JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, an elderly couple and their son, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 109, 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. They argued that they have clean antecedents, are senior citizens, and that the FIR contains only a general and omnibus allegation of abuse, with the specific assault on the informant's brother being attributed to another accused, Prayag. The State contended that the petitioners were present at the scene and that a process under Sections 84 and 85 of the BNSS (equivalent to Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.) had been lawfully issued. The Court examined the submissions and found that the allegations, though general, were sufficient to deny the privilege of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the Court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the FIR's general allegations and their age/clean antecedent.
- Whether the presence of the petitioners at the scene, as alleged in the FIR, justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the process under Sections 84 and 85 of the BNSS is valid for the petitioners.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- general and omnibus allegation
- false implication
- senior citizen
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12587 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDAN District- Banka
======================================================
1. Satyanarayan Jha Son of Late Kartik Jha R/o Village - Lathane, Police
Station - Chandan, Distirct -Banka.
2. Ajhola Devi W/o Satyanaryan Jha R/o Village - Lathane, Police Station -
Chandan, Distirct -Banka.
3. Gyanand Jha @ Gayanand Jha Son of Satynaryan Jha R/o Village - Lathane,
Police Station - Chandan, Distirct -Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 28-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2),
118(1), 109, 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent petitioner no. 2 is a
woman and is a senior citizen aged about 60 years and the
informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners
on 11.08.2024 at 12:30 PM came and started abusing and
throwing bricks, on objection the accused persons assaulted his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12587 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
brother and Prayag assaulted his brother by bamboo
indiscriminately causing injury on head and thereafter fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature.
It is next submitted that specific allegation of assaulting the
brother of the informant by bamboo indiscriminately is against
Prayag. It is further submitted that no doubt brother of the
informant subsequently died, but then the entire family
members came to be implicated. It is further submitted that
petitioner no. 1 is aged about 80 years and petitioner no. 2, as
recorded hereinabove, is 60 years of age while petitioner no. 3 is
a young boy of aged about 21 years. It is next submitted that a
person, who has remained a person with clean antecedent all
throughout his life till 80 years and 60 years, have been
implicated in the instant case with general and omnibus
allegation of abuse and assault. It is further submitted that
petitioners, being parents and brother of Prayag, came to be
implicated with a view to coerce Prayag into submission. It is
next submitted that during the course of investigation, no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12587 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
witnesses came forward stating that petitioners had also
assaulted the deceased.
5. At this stage, the learned APP for the State submits
that though allegation against the petitioners in the FIR with
regard to abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature, but
then the informant alleges that petitioners were also present at
the place of occurrence though specifically Prayag is alleged to
have assaulted the injured leading to his death. It is also
submitted that process under Sections 84 and 85 of BNSS
(corresponding Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.) has been issued
against the petitioners, on which the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioners submits that police in mechanical
manner investigates and implicates. It is also submitted that a
person who is nearing his grave has also been made an accused.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…