Patna High Court
Pappu Sah @ Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court allowed the petitioners' anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Pappu Kumar, Awadhesh Kumar and Kunti Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (P.S. No.248/2025) alleging assault with an iron rod, a knife, and theft of a gold mangalsutra, charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. They contended that the FIR was fabricated due to a long‑standing land dispute, that the injury report showed only superficial injuries, and that they have a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court examined the allegations, the lack of corroborative medical evidence, and the petitioners' claim of false implication. Applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions, including surety, personal appearance, and verification of antecedents. The order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the allegations, particularly under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, are substantiated enough to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioners pose a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or committing similar offences.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 125(a), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- false implication
- land dispute
- assault
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1469 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Pappu Sah @ Pappu Kumar, Son of Late Shankar Sah @ Late Shankar Sah
Bhagat Resident of Village- Dumarbana, Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Pakaridayal,
Dist.- East Chamaparan.
2. Awadhesh Kumar, Son of Late Shankar Sah Bhagat @ Son of Late Shankar
Sah @ Late Shankar Sah Resident of Village -Dumarbana, Ward no. - 10,
P.S. - Pakaridayal, Dist. - East Chamaparan.
3. Kunti Devi, Wife of Late Shankar Sah @ Son of Late Shankar Sah @ Late
Shankar Sah Bhagat Resident of Village -Dumarbana, Ward no. - 10, P.S. -
Pakaridayal, Dist. - East Chamaparan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Pakaridayal P.S. Case No.248 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 125(a),
352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that
petitioner no. 2 had assaulted the informant with an iron rod,
while petitioner no.1 had assaulted with knife upon the daughter
of the informant and petitioner no.3 is said to have snatched
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1469 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
away gold mangalsutra.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case and the
injury report which has been brought on does not corroborate
the allegations levelled in the FIR. It has further been submitted
that from perusal of the injury report, it would be evident that
the injuries were found to be simple and very superficial in
nature. It has next been submitted that there is long-standing
land dispute between the parties and on account of the same,
some altercations have taken place and a false and concocted
story has been cooked up only to implicate the petitioners in the
present case, however, the offences under Section 109 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is not made out from a plain
reading of the FIR. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioners carries clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1469 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each 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
Pakaridayal P.S. Case No.248 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 B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall
be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive
dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by
the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed
their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take
step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners.
However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose
of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1469 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.