Patna High Court
Ganga Yadav @ Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that, on a prima facie basis of a free fight and the petitioner's clean antecedent, anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita should be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Ganga Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging assault with intent to kill under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. He claimed the incident was a mutual free fight and that any injury he caused was in self‑defence, asserting a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the charges. The High Court examined the FIR and found a prima facie case of a free fight, noting the petitioner's clean antecedent. Consequently, the Court directed the District Court to grant anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail bond and sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and verification of any pending cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the alleged assault and intent to kill.
- Whether the facts indicate a free fight/self‑defence that justifies bail.
- Whether the petitioner's clean criminal antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- self‑defence
- free fight
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- assault
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19598 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2024 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
======================================================
Ganga Yadav @ Amit Kumar Son of Jalim Yadav Resident of village
Muradpur, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Parbatta, District - Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Choudhary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Chandra Sen
Prasad Singh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 401 of 2024 registered under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 303(2),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
petitioner, along with other accused, armed with weapons,
assaulted the informant and his sons, causing serious injuries
including a head injury and fracture, with an alleged intention to
kill.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19598 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. The present
case is a counter blast of Parbatta P.S. Case No. 410 of 2024
lodged from the side of the petitioner, which shows that the
occurrence was a case of free fight. No specific overt act has
been attributed to the petitioner causing grievous injury and the
petitioner’s side has also sustained injuries in the same
occurrence. The petitioner, in his self-defense, may have caused
some injury on the person of the informant, without intention.
The petitioner has clean antecedent. On these grounds, the
petitioner seeks to be released on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, upon perusal of the FIR, this
Court finds that there is a case and counter case between the
parties arising out of the same occurrence, which prima facie
indicates a free fight. The petitioner, in his self-defense, may
have caused some injury on the person of the informant, without
intention. I am of the opinion that the petitioner having clean
antecedent has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on
pre-arrest bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19598 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court 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 District Court where the case is pending
in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 401 of 2024, subject
to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…