Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of a bond and compliance with statutory conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar, was implicated in FIR No. 142 of 2025 for alleged assault and offences under the BNS, 2023 and the Arms Act. He contended that the FIR contains only a general, omnibus allegation against him and no specific charge, asserting that he was implicated merely as the father of a co‑accused. The prosecution opposed his bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the absence of any specific allegation of assault or overt act against him, with the firing charge directed solely at another accused. Consequently, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being named in an omnibus allegation in the FIR.
- Whether the lack of specific charges against the petitioner warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 27, 35
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- omnibus allegation
- clean antecedent
- Arms Act
- Section 438
- Section 482
- assault
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1438 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- BARAHAT District- Banka
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Yadav S/O Sutar Yadav R/O Village- Mirjapur,
P.S- Barahat, Distt.- Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Barahat P.S. Case No. 142 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
16.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 109(1), 352, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 25(1-B)
a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
accused persons came at the house of the informant and started
abusing and beating the husband of the informant and other
family members. It is further alleged that co-accused Munna
Ray fired on the husband of the informant due to which he
sustain injury.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1438 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From
perusal of F.I.R. it appears that F.I.R. is in two parts; in first part
there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused
persons including the petitioner and in second part, allegation of
firing is attributed against co-accused Munna Ray that he has
fired upon the husband of the informant and he has received the
injury. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner in
the F.I.R. rather there is general and omnibus allegation against
the petitioner. Both the parties are agnates. Petitioner has been
made accused in this case only due to being father of the co-
accused, namely, Md. Sarfaraz.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent, there is no specific allegation of
assault or overt act against the petitioner in the F.I.R., specific
allegation of firing is attributed against co-accused Munna Ray,
let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1438 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/4
surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days
from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Barahat
P.S. Case No. 142 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other
following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1438 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
4/4
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…