Patna High Court
Satendra Singh @ Netaji @ Satyendra SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and conditions, noting that the allegations were speculative and the petitioner pledged cooperation.
Summary
Satendra Singh sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, based on an informant's allegation that his husband was abducted with his involvement. The petitioner argued that the allegations were purely speculative, that the FIR showed no concrete evidence or dispute, and that he would cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner might abscond and that the investigation was ongoing. The Court examined the merits of the suspicion-based accusation and the risk of non‑cooperation, and decided to grant anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.25,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order also stipulated that the bail could be cancelled if the petitioner fails to cooperate or if a charge‑sheet is filed against him.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail when the accusation is based solely on suspicion?
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or non‑cooperation with the investigation.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC can be imposed to safeguard the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 137(2), 140(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- suspicion
- false implication
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Section 482
- investigation cooperation
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16039 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Satendra Singh @ Netaji @ Satyendra Singh S/O Late Ganesh Singh R/O
Vill.- Madhurapur, P.S.- Bidupur, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2),
140(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that her husband Ratnesh had come to his village on 05.08.2024
from Madhurapur and her husband does not have a mobile,
further on 09.09.2024, petitioner called her on her mobile and
informed that her husband is well, next alleges that her mother-
in-law suffered fracture of leg, on account of which, she became
involved with her, further when she did not get any information
about her husband for a long time, the informant came to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16039 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
2/4
village Madhurapur on 30.12.2024 but did not find her husband,
thus enquired from petitioner who started evading, thus alleges
that her husband was abducted in connivance with the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant based on suspicion. It is next submitted that from
perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that the date of occurrence
is 09.09.2024 and the FIR came to be instituted on 07.01.2025.
It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that
informant being wife of the victim would not have made
endeavour to know about the whereabouts of the victim when
she was aware that he does not carry mobile. It is also submitted
that the informant could have called to the petitioner after
09.09.2024 if the victim was not contacting her. It is next
submitted that though informant in the FIR alleges that she got
involved with her mother-in-law who suffered fracture of leg
but then that itself by no stretch of imagination could be
construed to have given an excuse to the informant of not trying
to find out the whereabouts of her husband. It is next submitted
that entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is further
submitted that FIR does not even remotely suggest that there
was any dispute in between petitioner and the victim.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16039 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
3/4
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that no doubt the
petitioner has been implicated in the instant case based on
suspicion but then from the FIR it is admitted that the victim is
traceless and the investigation of the case is continuing and if
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, 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.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 Bidupur P.S. Case No.16/2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16039 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
4/4
despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8. It is further made clear that the present anticipatory
bail order shall come to an end, in the event, if charge sheet is
submitted against the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…