Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nagendra PandeyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted and rejected the petitioner's application.

Summary

The petitioner, Nagendra Pandey, sought anticipatory bail in a case (Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 443 of 2025) where he is accused of assaulting an informant's husband with an iron rod, causing grievous injuries. The FIR charges him under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner claimed innocence and alleged that the allegations were fabricated, while the State highlighted the seriousness of the injuries and the petitioner's pending criminal case. The High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the circumstances did not merit such relief. The Court directed the petitioner to surrender within six weeks and instructed the trial court to consider his surrender‑cum‑bail application on its merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged grievous injuries and pending criminal case.
  • Whether the nature of the alleged offence and the petitioner's criminal antecedents justify denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • grievous injury
  • surrender
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21700 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
                                                       Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Nagendra Pandey S/o Late Singhasan Pandey R/O Vill- Chain Patti, P.S.-
                 Gopalganj, District-Gopalganj
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms. Shyamli Kumari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 443 of 2025, dated 12.06.2025,

                   lodged under Section 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352 & 3(5) of

                   the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as

                   “BNS, 2023”), pending before the Court of District Additional

                   Sessions Judge-I, Gopalganj.

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   two named accused persons, including the present petitioner.

                   The specific allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted

                   the informant’s husband with an iron rod, due to which the

                   informant’s husband sustained injuries.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
         Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21700 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                     2/2




                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

                   further submits that most of the allegations are false and

                   fabricated. Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedents of

                   the petitioner are not clean, as one criminal case is pending

                   against him.

                                5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                   bail of the petitioner and submits that the injuries sustained are

                   grievous in nature.

                                6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

                   not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                   Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                   hereby rejected.

                                7. It is directed to the petitioner to surrender before

                   the Trial Court within a period of 6 weeks from today. In case,

                   the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, then the Trial Court

                   is directed to pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application

                   on the same day without being prejudice that the anticipatory

                   bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and the

                   Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.



                                                                        (Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.