Patna High Court
Sachin PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to petitioners 1 and 2 but granted it to petitioner 3 subject to a bail bond and verification conditions.
Summary
The petitioners Sachin Pandit, Raghunath Pandit and Nilam Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in a case alleging assault with weapons and a violation of the Arms Act. The FIR implicated them alongside a co-accused, Govind Pandit, who allegedly fired at a victim. The petitioners claimed innocence, asserting that only Govind Pandit was responsible and that they were falsely implicated; they also highlighted that petitioners 1 and 2 have prior criminal records while petitioner 3 has a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the direct assault allegations and the criminal antecedents of petitioners 1 and 2. The Court rejected anticipatory bail for petitioners 1 and 2 due to the seriousness of the allegations and their past records, but granted anticipatory bail to petitioner 3, a woman with no prior record, subject to a Rs.30,000 bail bond and verification conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in view of the alleged offences and their criminal antecedents.
- Whether the presence of prior criminal records for petitioners 1 and 2 justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner 3 with conditions despite the pending charges.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 2(1)(d), 482
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 329(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- BNSS 2023
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Arms Act
- assault
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37932 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2025 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Sachin Pandit S/o- Ram Pandit Resident of Village- Khajauli PS- Khajuli
Dist- Madhubani
2. Raghunath Pandit S/o- Late Ramlakhan Pandit Resident of Village- Khajauli
Ps- Khajuli Dist- Madhubani
3. Nilam Devi @ Lilam Devi D/o- Sri Ram Pandit @ Ram Pandit Resident of
Village- Khajauli Ps- Khajuli Dist- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The present criminal miscellaneous application has
been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS, 2023’) for
grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners who apprehend arrest
in connection with Khajauli P.S. Case No. 184 of 2025, lodged
on 02.09.2025, under Sections 126(2)/115(2) /109 /329(4) /
303(2)/352/351(2)/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and
under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37932 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
seven named accused persons including the present petitioners
with allegation that they armed with weapon entered into her
house and started abusing and assaulting. When the informant
objected, co-accused Govind Pandit fired at her father-in-law
with pistol. Accused Sachin Pandit, Raghunath Pandit and
Nilam Devi assaulted the informant and her father-in-law with
sword, spade and Khanti, due to which they sustained injury.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel submits that the entire prosecution case seems to be
planted and concocted after thought. He submits that the
specific allegation is against co-accused Govind Pandit of firing.
He submits that petitioners are the family members of co-
accused Govind Pandit and they have been falsely implicated in
this case. He submits that petitioners and informant both are
next door neighbour. He submits that petitioner Nos.1 and 2
have one criminal antecedent and petitioner No.3 has clean
antecedent. Counsel further submits that petitioners are ready to
fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon
them.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners and submits that there are direct allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37932 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
of assault against the petitioners and petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have
criminal antecedent. He fairly submits that petitioner No.3 has
clean antecedent.
6. Considering the fact that there are direct allegation
of assault against petitioner Nos.1 and 2 as well as criminal
antecedent, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to
them. Hence, anticipatory bail application of petitioner Nos.1
and 2 is hereby rejected. However, in the event of surrender of
the petitioners within four weeks from today, the prayer for
regular bail shall be considered on the same day without being
prejudiced by the order of this Court.
7. As far as petitioner No.3 is concerned, considering
the fact that petitioner No.3 is a lady having clean antecedent,
let petitioner No.3 be released on anticipatory bail, in the event
of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each as mentioned in
Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Madhubani, in connection with Khajauli
P.S. Case No. 184 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
8. And further condition that the Trial Court shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37932 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner No.3 and in case
at any stage it is found that the petitioner No.3 has concealed
her criminal antecedent, the Trial Court shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.