Patna High Court
Azad KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Azad Kumar and Santosh Choudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging extortion, assault, robbery and possession of arms. The FIR described a group of twelve accused, including the petitioners, intercepting the informant’s brother, demanding money, assaulting him with a rod, sword and knife, and stealing valuables. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, that no specific allegation of assault was made against them, and that one petitioner was merely a relative of another accused. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties and compliance with Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with a condition that bail may be cancelled if they fail to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
- Whether the material in the FIR sufficiently links the petitioners to the alleged offences to deny bail
- Whether the petitioners are likely to abscond or tamper with evidence
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 308(2), 351(2), 352
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- extortion
- assault
- robbery
- Arms Act
- Section 438
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16519 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2025 Thana- BARBIGHA District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
1. Azad Kumar S/o Late Dharamveer Mahto Resident of Village - Narayanpur,
P.S.- Barbigha, Dist.- Sheikhpura
2. Santosh Choudhary @ Santosh Kumar Choudhary S/o Basudev Choudhary
Resident of Village - Narayanpur, P.S.- Barbigha, Dist.- Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinkar Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
191(3), 190, 308(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 303(2), 352 and
351(2) of the BNS, 2023 as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
the informant alleges that his brother Dhananjay on 26.10.2025, at
08:00 p.m., was returning home from the house of Monu when he
was intercepted by 12 named accused persons including the
petitioners along with 10 unknown accused and the accused
persons stopped his car near a temple and demanded extortion of
Rs.50,000/- on the pretext that he earns a lot. On objection, Ankit
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16519 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
and Kaila assaulted the brother of the informant by rod causing
injury on back of his head and his brother fell unconscious
thereafter Santu assaulted him by sword causing injury on back of
head. Further, Gautam assaulted by knife causing injury over left
eyebrow of the brother of the informant and the accsued snatched
his gold chain worth Rs.1,50,000/- and took out Rs.20,000/- and
while fleeing Mantu and Ankit threatened that if any case is
instituted then he will be implicated in a case under the SC/ST Act
and also fired.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific
allegation of assault and abuse is alleged against the petitioners. It
is next submitted that petitioner no. 2 is the father of Ankit, as
such, he also came to be implicated only with a view to coerce
Ankit into submission. It is also submitted that if the privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, the petitioners will
not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove
their innocence. It is submitted that no doubt, the injury suffered
by the injured has been opined to be grievous but then petitioners
are not alleged to have assaulted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16519 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let the petitioners,
above-named, in the event of their 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) each
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 Barbigha P.S. Case No. 200 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating
Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial
Court bringing to its notice that the petitioners, despite giving
assurance to this Court, are not cooperating in the investigation,
the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds
of the petitioners.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…