Patna High Court

Pawan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 28 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to petitioner 1 and denied to petitioner 2.

Summary

Petitioners Pawan Kumar and Rahul Kumar sought anticipatory bail in a case where co‑accused allegedly fired on the nephew of an informant, resulting in death. The prosecution alleged the petitioners were involved in reconnaissance for the crime, but no specific overt act was attributed to them. The State opposed bail, highlighting five prior criminal convictions of petitioner 2. The Court, considering the lack of direct involvement and the nature of the accusation, granted anticipatory bail to petitioner 1 subject to a bail bond and sureties, while refusing bail to petitioner 2 due to his criminal antecedents. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner 1 despite the allegations under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Whether the criminal antecedents of petitioner 2 justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Whether Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita permits the Court to conditionally grant bail in this circumstance.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal antecedents
Arms Act
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Section 482
high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14474 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2025 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Pawan Kumar S/O Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village - Pawar, P.S-
                  Pawan,Dist- Bhojpur(Ara)
           2.     Rahul Kumar S/O Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village - Pawar, P.S-
                  Pawan,Dist- Bhojpur(Ara)
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                             Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Anant Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

                   State.

                                2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for

                   the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, on 23.07.2025, co-accused

                   Ravi Kumar, Ankit Kumar and Jugesh Singh fired upon the

                   nephew of informant as a result of which, he died on the spot.

                   These petitioners are alleged to have been recceing the nephew

                   of informant on the instigation of co-accused Bhola Yadav.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

                   submits that specific accusation of firing is against other co-

                   accused persons. So far these petitioners are concerned, there is
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14474 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      no allegation of any specific overt act against them. Petitioners

                      are not the assailants of the deceased.

                                   5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail

                      application and submits that petitioner no. 2 has got five

                      criminal antecedents.

                                   6. Considering the criminal antecedents of petitioner

                      no. 2, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no. 2 is

                      refused.

                                   7. However, considering the nature of accusation

                      against petitioner no. 1, the anticipatory bail with regard to

                      petitioner no. 1 is allowed and it is ordered that the above

                      named petitioner no. 1 in the event of his arrest/surrender before

                      the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be

                      enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten

                      thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                      satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara

                      in connection with Udwantnagar P. S. Case No. 370 of 2025,

                      subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

                      Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…