Patna High Court
Bashisth Chaubey @ Bashisthmuni ChaubeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court allowed the petition for regular bail, granting bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Bashisth Chaubey, a 70‑year‑old bataidar, was arrested in connection with a case of forced harvesting of agricultural land that allegedly resulted in a shooting death and injuries to four persons. He was charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner pleaded innocence, asserted he had no prior criminal record, and argued that his advanced age and the length of his pre‑trial custody warranted bail. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the fact that co‑accused had previously been denied bail. After considering the submissions and the petitioner’s circumstances, the Court granted regular bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with procedural requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether a petitioner accused of serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act is entitled to regular bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s age and period of pre‑trial detention justify the grant of bail.
- Whether the requirement of a clean antecedent should affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 352, 50, 61(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- age factor
- serious offences
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- clean antecedent
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17500 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2026 Thana- SIKRAUL District- Buxar
======================================================
Bashisth Chaubey @ Bashisthmuni Chaubey Son of Late Ramji Chaubey R/o
Village - Bhakhwa, P.S - Sikraul, District - Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Alias Ashok Karn
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar
For the Informant : Mr. Om Prakash
Mr. Uday Shankar Pandey
Mr. Prabhakar Dubey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Sikraul P.S. Case No. 06 of 2026 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 109,
50, 61(2), 103(1), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
others had gone to the place of occurrence to forcibly harvest
the agricultural field, and in the process, Kanhaiya Chaubey
allegedly fired a shot and killed the deceased. The petitioner and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17500 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
other accused persons are also said to have assaulted the
prosecution side, causing injuries to four persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. The
petitioner is in custody since 07.01.2026 and has no criminal
antecedents. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a
bataidar and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not
assaulted anybody and is a 70-year-old person.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. It is
submitted that co-accused Priyank Kumar Upadhyay @ Priyank
Upadhyay and Shubham Upadhyay, who are not named in the
FIR but are alleged to have participated in the crime, had moved
for bail before this Court, which was rejected on 01.04.2026 in
Cr. Misc. No. 19999 of 2026.
6. I have considered the submissions of the parties and
have gone through the records of the case. Though the petitioner
is named in the FIR but considering the age of the petitioner and
the period of custody, this application for regular bail is allowed.
7. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17500 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
pending/successor Court in connection with Sikraul P.S. Case
No. 06 of 2026 subject to conditions that:-
(i). The petitioner shall appear
before the court below on each and every
date physically till the framing of charge,
and thereafter he shall appear during the
trial regularly, either personally or through
his counsel. He shall cooperate in the trial,
and any non-cooperation in the trial shall
result in cancellation of his bail bond.
(ii). At the time of accepting the
bail bonds of the petitioner, the Court below
shall verify the fact whether the petitioner
has clean antecedent or not. If it is found
that the petitioner has clean antecedent then
only his bail bonds shall be accepted by the
Court below. However, it is made clear that
the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein
is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.