Patna High Court
Nitin Rajvanshi @ Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions, as the allegations did not warrant denial of bail.
Summary
Petitioners Nitin and Pankaj Rajvanshi sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No.30 of 2026) alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault with a pistol. The prosecution’s informant claimed the accused assaulted her and that a co‑accused, Ajit Rajvanshi, used a pistol, after which the accused fled. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated due to a land dispute, that the specific pistol‑related allegation pertained only to Ajit, and that they have clean antecedents. The court examined the allegations, the petitioners’ claim of false implication, and the risk of them absconding or tampering with evidence. It granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions, including surety bonds, presence in court, and verification of criminal antecedents. The order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners despite the serious allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to flee, tamper with evidence, or repeat similar offences.
- Whether the allegations specifically implicate the petitioners or are limited to a co‑accused.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 34, 3(5), 352, 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- land dispute
- assault
- pistol
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33439 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2026 Thana- NIMCHAKBATHANI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Nitin Rajvanshi @ Nitish Kumar Son of Ashok Rajvanshi @ Asha Rajvanshi
@ Ashok Kumar Resident of Mohalla- Dhakani, P.S.- Neemchak Bathani,
District- Gaya.
2. Pankaj Rajvanshi @ Pankaj Kumar Son of Ashok Rajvanshi @ Asha
Rajvanshi @ Ashok Kumar Resident of Mohalla- Dhakani, P.S.- Neemchak
Bathani, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No.30 of 2026 registered for
the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 109, 34, 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that while she was cleaning her field for construction of
a house, the named accused persons, including the petitioner,
arrived there and started abusing and assaulting the informant. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33439 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
2/4
is alleged that one co-accused, namely Ajit Rajvanshi, assaulted
the informant with a pistol, due to which he sustained head
injuries. It is further alleged that when the villagers arrived, all
the accused persons fled away after throwing the pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of
general and omnibus allegations of abuse and assault. It has
further been submitted that the specific allegation of assaulting
the informant with the butt of the pistol is upon co-accused Ajit
Rajvanshi, and it is he who is said to have fled away after
throwing the pistol. It has next been submitted that the
informant and Runi Devi belong to the same family and on
account of a land dispute between the families, the petitioners
and others have been implicated in the present case with general
and omnibus allegations. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioners carry clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33439 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
3/4
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No.30 of 2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of
B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at
liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it
is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However,
the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-
mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or
in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33439 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
4/4
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/ayushkr-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.