Patna High Court
Kallu Chaudhary @ Dev Raj ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court held that a prima facie case for anticipatory bail exists and granted it subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Kallu Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 after a lower court rejected his earlier application. He was accused of inflicting knife injuries and assaulting an informant, Manu Singh, and of stealing a gold chain, with charges under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNSS. The petitioner claimed false implication, arguing that the FIR described only a minor injury to a non‑vital part of the body, and asserted he would not misuse liberty. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents. The High Court, relying on the guidelines in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (2020), found a prima facie case for bail, noting no material to suggest danger to justice, and ordered anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 despite the seriousness of the offences alleged.
- Whether the FIR’s description of injury and the claim of false implication warrant denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- BNSS Act
- false implication
- criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1961 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-518 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran
======================================================
Kallu Chaudhary @ Dev Raj Chaudhary, S/O Gariba Chaudhary, R/o - Near
Jarti Maiya Ratanpura, P.S.- Bhagwan Bajar, Dist.- Saran.
... ... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of
BNSS, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner after rejection
of his anticipatory bail application by order dated 28.11.2025
passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge-XIII,
Saran, Chapra, seeking Anticipatory Bail in connection with
Bhagwan Bajar P.S. case no.518 of 2025 registered under
Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of B.N.S.,
District-Saran.
3. Brief facts of the case, which are required to be stated
are that on 11.09.2025 at about 07:00 P.M., the informant-Manu
Singh was going to his house from market. When he reached at
Ratanpura Futani Chowk near the house of Bhagwan Rai, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1961 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/5
petitioner (Kallu Chaudhary alias Dev Raj Chaudhary) and co-
accused Vishal Chaudhary surrounded him. At that time, co-
accused Vishal Chaudhary pointed ‘Katta” at the informant
whereas the petitioner with an intention to kill him inflicted
several knife injuries on his head and neck. Thereafter, co-
accused Vishal Chaudhary caused assault to the
informant/injured with the butt of Katta and other F.I.R. named
accused caused assault to the informant with rod and danda. It
is also alleged that the petitioner snatched the gold chain from
the neck of the informant.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further
submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of
concocted story. No such injury has been caused to the
informant by the petitioner as alleged in the F.I.R. Referring to
the observation made in the order dated 28.11.2025 passed by
the Additional District and Sessions Judge-XIII, Saran, Chapra,
in A.B.P. No.4122 of 2025, it is pointed out that the
informant/injured received only one injury on his right arm,
which is caused by hard and blunt object and is simple in nature.
Petitioner has criminal antecedents of four cases and in all four
cases, he is on bail. Averment in this regard has been mentioned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1961 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/5
in paragraph no.3 of the bail application. Pursuant to F.I.R. of
this case, the petitioner has apprehension of imminent arrest.
Lastly, it is submitted that in case the petitioner is granted
anticipatory bail, he would not misuse the liberty and cooperate
with the investigation/trial of this case.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the
State opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in the light of the allegations made in the F.I.R. He
also submits that as on date there is no material on record to
presume the false implication of the petitioner. Considering the
prosecution case, cognizable offence is made out against the
petitioner.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find
that the informant/injured has received only one injury on his
non-vital part of the body, which is not corroborated from the
F.I.R. version. As on date there is no material on record to
presume that there is danger, of course, of justice being thwarted
by grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as noted
above, reasonable apprehension of arrest of the petitioner, taking
into consideration the gravity of offence, nature of accusation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1961 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/5
and there being no possibility of his fleeing away from justice,
this Court is of the view that in the light of guidelines laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs
State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1, prima facie the
petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest or
surrender of the petitioner above-named within two weeks from
today in the aforesaid case, he shall be released on anticipatory
bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Five Thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the concerned Court below in connection
with the aforesaid case, subject to conditions laid down under
Section 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this
anticipatory bail application is allowed.
9. In case, at any stage it is found that the petitioner has
disclosed his incomplete criminal history before this Court,
learned Court below shall be at the liberty to cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied
that the he has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his
knowledge of the same.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1961 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
5/5
to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail
application and will not effect the merits of the case.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh, J)
P.S./-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.