Patna High Court
Rambali RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The Court rejected the second anticipatory bail application, holding that the earlier dismissal and direction to surrender preclude a fresh anticipatory bail order.
Summary
The petitioners, who are the mother‑in‑law, father‑in‑law and brothers‑in‑law of a deceased woman, filed a second application for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 80 read with 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Their earlier anticipatory bail application had been dismissed by a coordinate bench, which directed them to surrender before the lower court and seek regular bail, noting that the husband of the deceased had been granted default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. Instead of complying, the petitioners again approached the High Court for anticipatory bail. The State argued that the petitioners had ignored the earlier direction and were improperly seeking anticipatory bail a second time. The Court observed that the first application had been rejected with a clear directive to surrender and that no new circumstances justified a fresh anticipatory bail order. Consequently, the Court rejected the second anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether a second anticipatory bail application can be entertained after the first has been dismissed with a direction to surrender and seek regular bail
- Whether the benefit of default bail granted to the husband can be extended to the petitioners
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 167(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 80
- Section 167(2)
- repeat bail application
- default bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12721 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-676 Year-2024 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Rambali Rai S/o Late Nagendra Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua,
District- Vaishali
2. Paro Devi W/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua,
District- Vaishali
3. Vipin Kumar S/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua,
District- Vaishali
4. Bharat Kumar S/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua,
District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is the second attempt, for grant of anticipatory
bail, arising out of Desari Police Station Case No. 676 of 2024,
disclosing offences under Sections 80 read with Section 3(5) of
the BNS, 2023.
3. The petitioners have renewed their prayer for
anticipatory bail which was disposed off by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court with direction to surrender before the court
below and make a prayer for regular bail but the petitioners,
instead of surrendering, have filed the anticipatory bail for the
second time.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioners that the husband of the deceased was granted default
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12721 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court directed the petitioners to surrender and
seek regular bail with the observation that there was no reason
why the same benefit should not be given to the petitioners
which was given to the husband. Since the husband was given
the benefit of default bail, there may not be the same occasion
that the petitioners would get default bail after surrender.
Petitioners are mother-in-law, father-in-law and brothers-in-law
of the deceased. Some of the accused persons who are Nand and
Nandosi have been granted anticipatory bail subsequently.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submits that at the
first instance, the bail application of the petitioners has been
dismissed with direction to surrender and seek regular bail, but
the petitioners, instead of seeking regular bail, have approached
this Court again for the anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties and the
fact that the anticipatory bail of the petitioners was rejected at
the first instance with a direction to surrender and seek regular
bail and no subsequent development has taken place after
rejection of first bail, accordingly, I am not inclined to consider
the application for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioners
filed for the second time.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12721 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
7. This application is, accordingly, rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
HarshPandey/-
U T
Checking your session…