Patna High Court
SHYAM KUMAR PANDEY @ SHYAM SUNDER PANDEY @ SHYAM KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the alleged offences were of a serious nature involving grievous injury.
Summary
Shyam Kumar Pandey and Radhe Shyam Pandey applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a criminal case (Paliganj P.S. Case No. 486 of 2025) alleging that they assaulted an informant with a kudaal and an iron rod, causing grievous injuries. The prosecution alleged that the assault was carried out on the orders of their father, Jai Mangal Pandey, and cited multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners contended that they were falsely implicated, highlighted a two‑day delay in filing the FIR, the informant’s intoxicated state, contradictions in witness statements, and asserted they have no prior criminal record. The Court examined the seriousness of the alleged offences, the nature of the injuries, and the statutory provisions, and concluded that the gravity of the allegations did not warrant the grant of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the application for anticipatory bail was rejected, and the petitioners were directed to surrender within four weeks and may seek regular bail thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged assault causing grievous injury.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences and the circumstances of the case justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352, 74, 76, 79
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- grievous injury
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- FIR delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3362 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-486 Year-2025 Thana- PALIGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
1. Shyam Kumar Pandey @ Shyam Sunder Pandey @ Shyam Kumar S/o Shri
Jai Mangal Pandey R/o village- Udaipur, P.S.- Paliganj, District.- Patna
2. Radhe Shyam Pandey @ Amar Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Jai Mangal Pandey
R/o village- Udaipur, P.S.- Paliganj, District.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection
with Paliganj P.S. Case no.486 of 2025, registered under
sections 109(1), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 74, 76, 79, 352, 351(3)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that the accused persons including the two petitioners herein
came variously armed. It is further stated that on the orders of
Jai Mangal Pandey, Shyam Sunder Pandey assaulted with a
kudaal on the head of the informant as a result of which he
sustained injuries on his head and eyes. It is further stated that
Radhe Shyam Pandey with ill intention pulled the cloth of his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3362 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
wife. The informant further states that Radhe Shyam Pandey
and Shyam Sunder Pandey continued their assault with iron rod
till the informant fell down having sustained injuries on various
parts of the body.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners
that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The
parties are agnates and there is dispute between them over an
ancestral house as has been mentioned in paragraph nos.6 and 7
of the petition. There is an unexplained delay of two days in
lodging of the F.I.R. The informant was in an intoxicated
condition and was hurling abuses when the occurrence took
place. There is contradiction in the statements of the witnesses.
The petitioners have no criminal antecedent and undertake to
cooperate in the investigation.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by
learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioners of
having assaulted the informant with kudaal and iron rod on the
head of the informant together with the contents of the injury
report wherein the injury on the informant has been found to be
grievous in nature, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3362 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
petitioners on anticipatory bail and the application is rejected.
7. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the
learned Court below within a period of four weeks.
8. In case the petitioners so surrender within the
aforesaid period and pray for regular bail, the same shall be
considered on its own merits without being prejudiced by this
order of rejection.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
U T
Checking your session…