Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj Ray @ PankajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted because the petitioner has a clean antecedent and the FIR allegations lack corroboration from the injury report.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging offences under several sections of the BNS. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the informant’s allegations of a knife attack were contradicted by the medical report, which described the injuries as caused by a blunt object. The State opposed bail, fearing the petitioner might abscond, while the petitioner assured cooperation with the investigation. The court examined the credibility of the FIR, the injury report, and the petitioner’s background. It concluded that the allegations were not sufficiently corroborated and that the petitioner was unlikely to flee. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, with one bailor being the petitioner’s father.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond if bail is denied.
- Whether the FIR allegations are substantiated by the medical injury report.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- injury report
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15699 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- JANTA BAZAR District- Saran
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj Ray @ Pankaj S/o- Shambhu Nath Yadav @
Shambhu Ray R/v- Patedhiya, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Meena Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The Investigating Officer of the case in
compliance of the order dated 24.03.2026 is present in the
Court.
3. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a young boy
aged about 26 years and the informant alleges that he along with
his brother were returning home after attending a wedding,
when they were intercepted by the accused persons including
the petitioner and they tried to commit loot, on alarm, Akhilesh
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15699 of 2026(3) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
gave orders to kill on which Ritik assaulted the informant by
knife while petitioner assaulted his brother by knife causing
injury on head requiring ten stitches.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that the informant alleges that
while he was coming back home along with his brother, they
were intercepted by the accused persons including the petitioner
with an intent to commit loot. It is next submitted that it does
not appear probable that the accused persons would have
intercepted the informant with an intent to commit loot when
they were known to the informant as the accused have been
implicated in the instant case by name. It is also submitted that
from side of the petitioner Janta Bazar P.S. Case No. 126 of
2025 has been instituted against the informant and his side. It is
next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in
the FIR it would manifest that as far as this petitioner is
concerned, the informant alleges that he assaulted his brother by
knife causing injury on head requiring ten stitches but then from
perusal of the injury report it would manifest that the injury has
been opined to be simple caused by hard and blunt substance
and the blow is not alleged to be repeated. It is thus submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15699 of 2026(3) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
that the informant with an intent to give seriousness to the case
falsely alleged that he along with his brother were assaulted
with knife by Ritik and petitioner but then the injury suffered by
informant also has been opined to be simple caused by hard and
blunt substance. On query of the Court from the Investigating
Officer of the case that as to whether the injured were assaulted
by knife or not, it is submitted that no doubt occurrence took
place but then both side assaulted each other and the injured
were assaulted by fatta (bamboo). It is also submitted that even
doctors have found the injury to be simple caused by hard and
blunt substance.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that if
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may
abscond on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence. It is also
submitted that in the nature of allegations as alleged in the FIR
which does not get corroborated by the injury report if petitioner
is sent to judicial custody his entire career would get
jeopardized and chances are bright that he may come in contact
with hardened criminals when admittedly petitioner is a person
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15699 of 2026(3) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
with clean antecedent.
7. Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner above-named, in
the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Janta Bazar P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
8. One of the bailor of the petitioner shall be his
father Shambhu Nath Yadav @ Shambhu Ray.
9. The personal appearance of the Investigating
Officer of the case is dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…