Patna High Court
Santosh Upadhyay @ Santosh Kumar UpadhyayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code fearing arrest in a case (PS No. 286 of 2024) involving multiple offences under the Bihar Negotiable Act (BNS). The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted an informant and his family during a land dispute, but the petitioner contended that a typographical error in the FIR misidentified the assailant and that the injury was simple. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The court noted the injury was simple, the FIR contained errors, and the petitioner’s apprehension of arrest, and therefore granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions, including surety, regular court appearances, police attendance, and non‑interference with witnesses. The order also required a modest bail amount and sureties to be posted within four weeks of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences and the nature of injury.
- Whether the typographical error in the FIR regarding the assailant affects the merits of the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of tampering with evidence or committing further offences.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Act (BNS) — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118, 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Bihar Negotiable Act
- typographical error
- simple injury
- land dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35400 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2024 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Santosh Upadhyay @ Santosh Kumar Upadhyay S/o Late Banwari Upadhyay
R/o Village - Naveen Gandhi Nagar, P.S - Dumariya Ghat, District - East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 21-05-2026 Heard Mr. Karandeep Kumar, learned Counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for
the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 286 of 2024 for the offence
registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 117(2), 109(1),
352, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that while he along with his parents were sitting outside, the
accused persons came, armed variously and the allegation is that
Daizy Devi and Satyam Kumar attacked on the hand of the
informant’s mother which got fractured. Thereafter, the
petitioner attacked the informant with farsa on the head causing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35400 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
2/4
injury. Again, Satyam Kumar assaulted his father with lathi.
DIAL 112 was called, the accused escaped, whereafter, the FIR.
4. At the outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner
submits that erroneously and due to typographical error in
paragraph 4, it has been wrongly recorded that Santosh Kumar
assaulted his father. Actually, he was assaulted by Satyam
Kumar, as would manifest from the FIR and for the said
typographical error, he undertakes to provide books worth Rs.
500/- to the Lawyer’s Association, Patna High Court with which
he is enrolled as a member. The receipt shall be filed thereafter.
5. The further submission is that though it is due to
the land dispute, exaggerated FIR in which even the females
have been implicated. Further, the injury inflicted by the
petitioner on the informant has been found to be simple in
nature, as would manifest from the learned Sessions Judge
order.
6. Learned APP for the State, Mr. Jitendra Kumar
Singh on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail
submitting that he has criminal antecedent.
7. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the aforesaid facts coupled with the fact that injury has been
found to be simple in nature, in that background, this Court is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35400 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
3/4
inclined to grant him the anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioner in the event of arrest or surrender
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the
order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of
Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, East Champaran, Motihari in connection
with Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 286 of 2024 subject to
condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
members/relatives of the petitioner, who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID)
to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail
bond by the Trial court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for next six months to mark
attendance and at the end of the period, the certificate be
submitted to the Court;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35400 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.