Patna High Court
Budhraj SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to regular bail on the condition of furnishing a bond and sureties, subject to revocation if they attempt to delay the trial.
Summary
The petitioners, Budhraj Singh and his son Guddu Kumar, were arrested in connection with offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 351(2), 352, 117(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. They applied for regular bail after an earlier anticipatory bail application was withdrawn following their arrest. The petitioners argued that they have clean or minimal antecedents, that the allegations of assault are vague, and that similar applicants (Rita Devi and Prince Kumar) had been granted anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seriousness of the offences warranted continued custody. The Court, after considering the submissions, ordered that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, while warning that the trial court may cancel bail if the petitioners attempt to delay the framing of charge or the trial. The order thus grants regular bail with conditions and leaves the trial court discretion to revoke it if necessary.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail despite the nature of the offences charged under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficiently specific to deny bail.
- Whether the earlier grant of anticipatory bail to other petitioners is persuasive in deciding the present bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- court discretion
- bond and sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28193 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-499 Year-2025 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Budhraj Singh S/o Late Ram Awatar Singh R/o Village - Bensagar, P.S. -
Dinara, District - Rohtas
2. Guddu Kumar S/o Budhraj Singh R/o Village - Bensagar, P.S. - Dinara,
District - Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Upadhyay, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 351(2),
352, 117(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean
antecedent and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case and
are in custody since 19.02.2026. It is further submitted that
petitioners had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory
bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 9785 of 2026 but the same was
permitted to the withdrawn by an order dated 30.03.2026 since
petitioners were arrested. It is next submitted that in Cr. Misc.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28193 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
No. 9785 of 2026 Rita Devi, Prince Kumar and Pappu Kumar
were also petitioners and the privilege of anticipatory bail was
granted to Rita Devi and Prince Kumar but then anticipatory
bail application of Pappu Kumar was rejected. It is also
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that allegation of assault is not specific
and while granting anticipatory bail to Rita Devi and Prince
Kumar, the Court had considered the case on its merit and in
detail and the case of the petitioners, if not akin, is similar to the
case of Rita Devi and Prince Kumar. It is lastly submitted that if
the privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioners, the
petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to
prove their innocence.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for regular bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, the petitioners,
above-named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Trial Court where the case is pending in connection with Dinara
P.S. Case No. 499 of 2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28193 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
6. However, it is made clear that if the learned Trial
Court comes to a conclusion that petitioners, after their release
on bail, are trying to delay the framing of charge or after
framing of charge are trying to delay the trial of the case in any
manner, the learned Trial Court, in both the conditions, shall be
at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…