Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Shubham Raj @ Shubham KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.

Summary

Shubham Raj, a student from Noida, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a police case (PS No. 522 of 2025) alleging assault, use of an iron rod, and theft under several sections of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s informant claimed that Raj and others attacked the informant’s son, causing injuries and snatching a gold chain. Raj contended that the FIR was lodged to suppress an altercation arising from a personal dispute and that the injuries were minor, asserting his clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., including a bail bond, sureties, and compliance with trial attendance requirements. The order emphasized that the bail conditions are not to delay verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and that the observations made are not binding during trial.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC in the present case?
  • Do the allegations under the cited sections of the B.N.S. warrant denial of anticipatory bail?
  • Whether the petitioner is likely to flee or tamper with evidence, justifying bail denial?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 B.N.S.
  • assault
  • false implication
  • bail conditions
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13984 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-522 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Shubham Raj @ Shubham Kumar S/o Mukti Narayan Singh R/o Village-
                 Majuraha ,P.S - Raghunathpur (Turkauliya), District- East Champaran

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 522 of 2025 dated

                   13.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 303(2) and 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has

                   alleged that the petitioner and others surrounded the son of the

                   informant and pushed him on the ground and started abusing. It

                   is further alleged that the petitioner assaulted with iron rod on

                   the head of the informant causing head injury while the other

                   co-accused persons assaulted with belt. It is also alleged that a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13984 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                            2/4




          gold chain was also snatched away.

                       4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has falsely been implicated and no such occurrence as

          alleged has occurred. It has further been submitted that on

          account of the son of the informant having misbehaved with the

          sister of the co-accused, Ankit Raj, an altercation had taken

          place and only to supress such activity, the present F.I.R. was

          lodged however, for the said incident, a counter case was also

          lodged by the co-accused, Ankit Raj being Motihari P.S. Case

          No. 535 of 2025. It has further been submitted that the injury

          sustained were found to be simple in nature and the same has

          also been incorporated in the impugned order. It has lastly been

          submitted that the petitioner is a student studying in Noida,

          N.C.R. and he has clean antecedent.

                       5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the

          parties 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. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand)
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13984 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                            3/4




          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 Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 522 of

          2025, 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) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the

          petitioner.

                        (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present

          before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial

          and shall cooperate in the investigation.

                        (iii) 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.

                        (iv) 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

          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.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13984 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                                       4/4




                                  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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.