Patna High Court
Govind SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail as there is no specific allegation against him, he has a clean antecedent, and a similarly situated co‑accused was previously granted bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Govind Sah, was implicated in a FIR dated 04-06-2020 for multiple offences under the IPC and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act. He sought anticipatory bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR specifically attributes the assault to another co-accused, Brij Mohan Sah. The prosecution opposed the bail. The Court noted the absence of a direct allegation against the petitioner, his clean record, and that a similarly situated co-accused had been granted anticipatory bail in a prior order. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. The bail order includes requirements for cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Whether the lack of a specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR justifies granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the grant of anticipatory bail to a similarly situated co‑accused influence the decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 333, 341, 353, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1807 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2020 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Govind Sah S/o Sriram Sah @ Shree Ram Shah R/o Village - Shivrajpur, P.S -
Kuchaikote, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard Mr. Saurabh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 198 of 2020, F.I.R.
dated 04.06.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 353, 333, 504 of the Indian
Penal Code and sections 48, 52 of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Amendment Act, 2016.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant
alleged that the chowkidar were monitoring the wine smugglers
at the place of occurrence, then the petitioner along with other
co-accused persons came and assaulted the police personnel.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits
that the allegation as alleged is false and fabricated and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1807 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the specific allegation
of assault is attributed against co-accused person, namely, Brij
Mohan Sah who assaulted the informant and there is no specific
allegation of assault or overt act against the petitioner in the
F.I.R. and similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Mantu
Yadav @ Brijbhan Yadav has been granted anticipatory bail by
this Court vide order dated 31.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
47428 of 2025.
5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent and the
similarly situated co-accused person has been granted
anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named,
in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below
within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the
order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.-IV-cum-Special Judge, Excise
Court No.- II, Gopalganj in connection with Kuchaikote P.S.
Case No. 198 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1807 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section
482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…