Patna High Court
Birmani Rajak @ Virmani RajakversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioners subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Birmani Rajak and Sita Devi, sought bail fearing arrest in a land‑dispute case (Silao PS Case No. 322 of 2025) involving multiple offences under the Bihar Negotiable (BNS) Act. The FIR alleged a violent incident where the informant and others were attacked with weapons, resulting in injuries and theft of gold. The petitioners argued they had clean antecedents (except one pending case for the wife) and that the FIR contained only a general allegation against all accused, lacking specific charges against them. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the injuries. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 despite the nature of the offences alleged in the FIR.
- Whether the FIR specifically implicates the petitioners or merely contains a general allegation against all accused.
- Whether the seriousness of the injuries and the pending land‑dispute case warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(3), 352, 74
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bihar Negotiable Act
- FIR
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18177 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2025 Thana- SILAO District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Birmani Rajak @ Virmani Rajak Son of Late Balak Rajak
2. Sita Devi Wife of Birmani Rajak @ Virmani Rajak
Both Resident of Gandhupur, Paghostwan, P.S.- Sibo, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard Mr.Binay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh-1, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Silao P.S. Case No. 322 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
31.10.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
190, 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 126(2), 115(2),74,303(2) and
351(3) and 352 of BNS.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant
namely Veena Devi stating therein that on 31.10.2025 at about
8.30 my land is situated at Gandhupur Thana No. 467, which
Khata No. 32, Kheshra No. 1084 is my father-in-law property,
in which, Title Suit No. 490 of 2022 is pending in the Court. On
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18177 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/4
getting information Veena Devi, one of my maternal uncles
attacked one with lathi, danda, pistols butt, then my family
members came after getting the information, they also killed one
and snatched the gold chain. They were will her, in which the
injured persons broke Veena Devi's hand, broke her head with
the butt of the pistol, broke Nibha Devi's leg and broke her head,
took away two bhar of gold chain and also took away Veena
Devi's gold chain. All of them together attacked with Hathiyar,
lathi, danda and pistols and caused bloodshed. Even before this
there was a dispute whose case number is 111 of 2025 which is
registered in Silao Police Station.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submits that petitioner No.1 has clean antecedent and petitioner
No.2 carries one more case other than the present one and he is
on bail in the said case. From a bare perusal of the FIR it
appears that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence
had taken place. Further submits that although the petitioners
are named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it
appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or
overt-act attributed against the petitioners rather there is general
and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including
the petitioners. There is case and counter case. Although the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18177 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/4
informant has received the injuries but the injury report of some
of injured person suggests that the injury is simple in nature and
one of the injuries of the injured person, namely, Veena Devi, is
grievous in nature but from a bare perusal of that injury it
appears that the injury is grievous due to fracture in hand which
is not a vital part of the body.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioners,
above named, in the event of their 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)each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Nalanda in connection with Silao P.S. Case No. 322
of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of
BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:-
(I) Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18177 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
4/4
reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…