Patna High Court
Rakesh Singh @ Rakesh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to Petitioner No.1 and granted to Petitioner No.3.
Summary
Petitioners Rakesh Singh (Petitioner No.1) and Rupesh Kumar (Petitioner No.3) applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging offences under multiple sections of the Bihar Negotiable Statutes (B.N.S.) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, relating to a forced entry, assault on an informant and his wife, and theft of gold ornaments. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, armed with deadly weapons, participated in the assault and robbery. The petitioners claimed innocence, arguing that the allegations were vague, omnibus, and lacked specific overt acts, and highlighted the clean record of Petitioner No.3. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the specific accusations and the 18 prior criminal convictions of Petitioner No.1. The court rejected anticipatory bail for Petitioner No.1 due to his criminal antecedents, but granted bail to Petitioner No.3, imposing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Petitioner No.1 given the nature of the allegations and his criminal antecedents
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Petitioner No.3 considering the general nature of the accusations and his clean record
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- assault
- theft
- Arms Act
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2100 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2025 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Rakesh Singh @ Rakesh Kumar Singh Son of Late Nageshwar Singh R/O
Village - Mahisaur, P.S.- Jandaha (O.P.- Mahisaur), District - Vaishali
2. Prince Kumar Son of Uday Singh R/O Village - Mahisaur, P.S.- Jandaha
(O.P.- Mahisaur), District - Vaishali
3. Rupesh Kumar Son of Rambabu Ray R/O Village - Chak Sahauli, P.S.-
Jandaha (O.P.- Mahisaur), District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Pranav Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
Petitioner No. 2 has already been dismissed as withdrawn vide
order dated 30.01.2026.
3. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 apprehend their arrest in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2), 329(3), 351(2)
and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2100 of 2026(4) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
4. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the
F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,
armed with deadly weapons, forcibly entered into house of
informant and assaulted informant and his wife. It is further
alleged that the accused persons also snatched gold chain.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. Allegation of assault is general and
omnibus and no specific accusation of overt act has been alleged
against these petitioners. Rest of the allegations are ornamental
in order to make the case grave. Petitioner No. 3 has got no
criminal antecedents.
6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and
submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and there is
specific accusation that they, along with other named accused
persons, entered into house of informant, assaulted informant
and his wife and snatched gold ornaments. Petitioner No. 1 has
got 18 criminal antecedents.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and criminal antecedents of Petitioner No. 1, the prayer for grant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2100 of 2026(4) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 is rejected.
8. So far as Petitioner No. 3 is concerned, considering
the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus
nature of accusation and clean antecedents of the petitioner, the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 3 is
allowed.
9. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
Petitioner No. 3 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of
Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge I, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Jandaha
(Mahisaur) P.S. Case No. 49 of 2025, subject to condition as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
10. With the aforesaid directions, this application
stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…