Patna High Court
Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail as there is no direct allegation against him and he has made out a prima facie case for release.
Summary
Shashi Kumar petitioned for pre‑arrest bail in a case where police alleged he obstructed the arrest of co‑accused Satyendra Yadav and assaulted officers. The petitioner claimed he was not present at the alleged incident, had a clean antecedent, and was falsely implicated. The State opposed the bail, citing the alleged obstruction and assault. The court observed that no direct allegation was made against the petitioner and that he had made out a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C and Section 482(2) BNSS, and directed verification of his criminal antecedent. The bail application was disposed with the grant of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite allegations of obstructing police arrest and assaulting officers
- Whether a prima facie case exists in favour of the petitioner for bail
- Applicability of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C and Section 482(2) BNSS to the bail order
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- obstruction of police
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- BNSS
- Cr.P.C
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.173 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2025 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Nawada
======================================================
Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Bhushan Kumar S/O Kuleshwar Prasad R/O Village-
Devra Beldari, P.S.- Sitamarhi, Distt.- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 132, 324(4),
262, 263(B), 351, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the police
force in course of investigation having found that co-accused
Satyendra Yadav was hiding in his house, they wanted to arrest
him, which was allegedly resisted by the petitioner and other
family members and in the said course they also abused and
assaulted the police force.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.173 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
not present at the time of alleged occurrence. Falsity of the
allegation is also apparent from the fact that seizure list was
prepared, however the same was not handed over to the
petitioner supporting the fact that the petitioner was not present
while the police force had tried to arrest the co-accused
Satyendra Yadav who is the co-villager of the petitioner.
Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has clean
antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the case. On
these grounds, learned seeks that the petitioner be released on
bail.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, I find that the petitioner is the co-villager
of co-accused Satyendra Yadav and he has no concern with him,
the petitioner is said to have restricted the police force in
discharging their duty, but in absence of direct allegation against
the petitioner, I find that the petitioner has, prima facie, made
out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the Court below within a period of four weeks from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.173 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned ACJM-VI, Nawada in connection with Sitamarhi P.S.
Case No. 59 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C / 482(2) BNSS.
8. The District Court is directed to verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner
is involved in some other cases as what has been stated in Para-
3 of the bail petition, this order will automatically lose its force.
9. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…