Patna High Court
Birendra PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSUL
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the case against him rests only on alleged presence and no specific overt act, and the prolonged detention without charge framing warrants relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Birendra Paswan, applied for regular bail in a case arising from a land dispute that escalated into an assault and alleged murder, with charges under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was present at the scene of the assault on Manish Kumar, but no specific overt act was attributed to him, and his son’s confession implicated others. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedent, and had been in custody for over five months without charge framing. The court noted the seriousness of the offences but observed that the evidence against the petitioner was limited to his presence and that prolonged pre‑trial detention warranted relief. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to monetary and surety conditions, emphasizing that the order was prima facie and not a determination on the merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with murder and common intention offences.
- Whether mere presence at the scene, without a specific overt act, is sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether prolonged pre‑charge detention without framing of charges justifies granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- common intention
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19418 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-798 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Birendra Paswan S/o- Late Shivmangal Paswan R/v- Ramgadhwa Ps-
Muffasil Motihari Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL ORDER
4 27-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Motihari Mufasil P.S. Case No. 798 of 2025, registered under
Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the background to the
occurrence is a land dispute inter se the parties. On 28.11.2025,
the accused, including the petitioner herein, were having the
disputed land measured. The informant's son, Manish Kumar,
was not satisfied with the measurement carried out on that date,
and accordingly, 13.12.2025 was fixed for a fresh measurement.
However, on 11.12.2025, two days prior to the scheduled re-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19418 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
2/4
measurement, the accused persons, including co-accused
Bhagmati Devi (petitioner in connected Cr. Misc. No. 17916 of
2026) and the present petitioner Birendra Paswan, came to the
door of the informant's son. Thereafter, the above-named
persons, along with some unidentified individuals, are alleged to
have assaulted Manish Kumar. On being informed, family
members rushed to the spot, whereupon the accused fled; only
two females among the accused could not escape and were
apprehended.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the allegations
levelled against him are general and omnibus in character,
arising from a pre-existing land dispute. In this connection, it is
relevant to note that Chandan Paswan, son of the present
petitioner, has himself confessed his involvement in the
occurrence. Chandan Paswan states that he had informed his
mother, his aunt, and his father, the present petitioner, about the
matter prior to the occurrence. He further states that one Rupesh
had an interest in calling Manish Kumar to the spot, and that
two friends of Rupesh Kumar came and stabbed Manish Kumar.
Chandan Paswan's statement also attests to the presence of the
petitioner in the vicinity at the time of the occurrence; however,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19418 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
3/4
no specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner in the said
statement. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no
criminal antecedent whatsoever and has been in custody since
20.12.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced on
either side and perused the case diary. The offences registered
are serious: Section 103(1) of the BNS pertains to murder, and
the petitioner is roped in under Section 3(5) on the theory of
common intention. These considerations weigh against the
petitioner. At the same time, a careful reading of the material on
record discloses that the case against the present petitioner rests
substantially on his alleged presence at the place rather than on
any specific overt act attributed directly to him. His son
Chandan Paswan, who has confessed his own involvement, does
not assign any particular role to the petitioner in the attack on
Manish Kumar. The genesis of the dispute is a land
measurement controversy between the parties, and the
allegations, insofar as they concern the present petitioner, are of
an omnibus nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent,
and the period of custody, running from 20.12.2025 to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19418 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
4/4
present date, now exceeds five months. Charge has not yet been
framed. Taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances,
and bearing in mind that the question of guilt is entirely a matter
for the trial court, I am of the considered opinion that the
petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to appropriate conditions.
7. Accordingly, let the petitioner, Birendra Paswan, be
released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari, or the concerned court
below, in connection with Motihari Mufasil P.S. Case No. 798
of 2025.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and is 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 whatsoever.
(Ansul, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.