Patna High Court
Sintu Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav @ Panda YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court held that, given the omnibus nature of the allegations, parity with co‑accused granted bail, and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, anticipatory bail should be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Sintu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a case involving multiple offences under the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the allegations against him were merely that he snatched valuables during a violent incident. The petitioner argued that the charges were omnibus, that there was a case and counter‑case, and that co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail, while also highlighting his clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing a specific accusation of snatching valuables and participation in the assault. The court considered the parity with co‑accused, the nature of the allegations, and the petitioner’s antecedent, and concluded that bail should be granted. Consequently, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, subject to a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite specific allegations of participation in the offence.
- Whether the omnibus nature of the allegations and parity with co‑accused who have been granted bail warrant granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent influences the decision to grant anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- omnibus allegation
- parity
- co‑accused
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 482
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17684 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2024 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Begusarai
======================================================
Sintu Kumar @ Pankaj Yadav @ Panda Yadav, S/o Indradev Yadav (Wrongly
written as Nandan Yadav in Impugned order) Resident of Village - Dariyapur,
P.S - Nayagoan, District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-06-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Nayagaon P.S. Case No.83 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2),
115(2), 352, 351(2), 109, 117(2) and 303(2) of the BNS.
3. On the alleged date and time of occurrence, all the
FIR named accused persons, including the petitioner, armed
with iron rod, lathi, and danda, brutally assaulted the informant
and one Krishna Kumar, due to which they sustained serious
injuries. The accused persons also tied the hands and legs of the
informant, and the petitioner snatched the valuables before he
was thrown into the water.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17684 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner, taking this
Court through the FIR, submitted that omnibus nature of
allegations has been levelled against eleven named accused
persons. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is only alleged
that he snatched the valuables, which appears to be concocted. It
is further submitted that there is a case and counter-case, and
prior to the institution of the present case, co-accused Nandan
Yadav instituted Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 82 of 2024 against the
informant and his persons. The persons of the petitioner’s side
have also sustained grievous injuries. Moreover, the petitioner
bears fair antecedent, and other co-accused persons against
whom there is allegation of assault have been extended the
privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 38784 of 2025 and 39570
of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that
there is a specific accusation against the petitioner of snatching
the valuables, besides participation in the crime.
6. Having considered the omnibus nature of allegation
as also the factum of case and counter-case, coupled with the
fact that the case of the petitioner is based on parity, inasmuch
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17684 of 2026(2) dt.01-06-2026
3/3
as other co-accused persons have been allowed the privilege of
anticipatory bail, as also the fair antecedent of the petitioner, let
the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of
his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Begusarai in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No.83 of
2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall
be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.