Patna High Court
Saryug Singh @ Saryu SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, finding no specific allegation of assault against him and considering the FIR delay and his clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Saryug Singh, was named in an FIR (Mali PS Case No. 39 of 2025) alleging multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arising from a dispute over construction work at a godown. The FIR, lodged seven days after the alleged incident, alleged that a group of persons, including the petitioner, obstructed work and threatened the supervisor, with specific assault allegations directed at another accused, Krishna Singh. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the allegations against him were general, there was a delay in filing the FIR, co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail, and he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the specific allegation against Krishna Singh. The Court, noting the lack of specific allegation against the petitioner, the FIR delay, and the clean record, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with witnesses, and refraining from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the allegations against the petitioner are general and not specific.
- Whether the seven‑day delay in lodging the FIR warrants denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused influences the petitioner's bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 329(3), 352
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- general allegations
- delay in FIR
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- section 438
- section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15556 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2025 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Saryug Singh @ Saryu Singh Son of Late Kauleshwar Singh R/O Vill.-
Dhibra Par Tolaltwa, P.S.- Mali, District- Aurnagabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Mali P.S. Case No.39 of 2025, F.I.R dated
11.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 329(3), 109,
303(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 11.02.2025
alleging that on 05.02.2025 at about 9:00 A.M., while boring
work was being carried out at the PACS godown at Dhibrapar,
Anshul Raj had gone there to supervise the work. During this
time, Krishna Singh, Mukhiya Kumar, Parvesh Singh, Prakash
Kumar Bari, Shyam Narayan Bari, Guddu Singh, Nitesh Kumar,
Vicky Singh, Bidwesh Singh, Gopal Singh, Naresh Singh,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15556 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
Sarjug Singh and 5–7 unknown persons arrived and obstructed
the construction work, stating that the godown work would not
be allowed. When Anshul Raj informed them that he had a No
Objection Certificate from the competent authority, they began
abusing him. It is further alleged that Krishna Singh assaulted
him on the head with a sword and Prakash Kumar fired from a
pistol while threatening that the godown work should not
continue. Consequently, the FIR was lodged.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there
is specific allegation of assault or overt act against Krishna
Singh and the allegations levelled against all the accused
persons, including the petitioner, are general and omnibus in
nature. It has next been submitted that the co-accused persons,
namely, Parvesh Sinha, Bidesh Singh, Naresh Singh and
Mukhiya have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail
vide order dated 08.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.60756 of
2025. It has further been submitted that there is a delay of 7
days in lodging of F.I.R., for which there is no valid
explanation. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has
clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail application but does not dispute the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15556 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
fact with regard to specific allegation of overt act having been
levelled against Krishna Singh.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against
the petitioner rather the allegations are general and omnibus,
there is a delay of 7 days in lodging of F.I.R., for which there is
no valid explanation and the co-accused persons have already
been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail and the petitioner
has clean antecedent. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant
the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or 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,
Aurangabad, in connection with Mali P.S. Case No.39 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15556 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.