Patna High Court

Shivam Kumar @ Shivam YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 2 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions.

Summary

Shivam Kumar (Shivam Yadav) applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments (B.N.S.) Act, 2023, alleging assault and theft. He contended that he has a clean record, the FIR was filed three days after the alleged incident, and the informant's allegations against him were vague and ornamental. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the delay in filing the FIR, the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner, and his claim of false implication. Considering these factors, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. Act.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482 of the B.N.S. Act.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR and lack of specific allegations justify granting anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 438 CrPC
Section 482 BNS
FIR delay
false implication
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18843 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2025 Thana- SABAUR District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Yadav Son of Ranjit Kumar Yadav @ Ranjeet
                 yadav Resident of Village - Bhithi, PS - Sabour, District - Bhagalpur
                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Amrendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-04-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 118(2), 109, 303(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS,

                   2023.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that on 01.07.2025, at about 03:30 p.m., when he

                   reached near his house, accused Ranjit started abusing him in a

                   drunken condition and on protest Ranjit’s son (petitioner) came

                   and Ranjit assaulted the informant by spade causing injury on

                   head and petitioner snatched Rs.3,000/- from his pocket.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18843 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

                     informant. It is further submitted that the date of occurrence is

                     01.07.2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 04.07.2025,

                     i.e., after a delay of three days of the occurrence. It is next

                     submitted that no specific allegation of assault is alleged against

                     the petitioner and the allegation of snatching Rs.3,000/- is

                     ornamental in nature.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                     anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                  6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                     counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,

                     above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a

                     period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail

                     on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)

                     with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

                     the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor

                     Court in connection with Sabour P.S. Case No. 238 of 2025,

                     subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

                     the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…