Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pawan Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail due to the absence of specific allegations, clean antecedent, and procedural irregularities in the FIR.

Summary

Pawan Kumar Singh was arrested on 11 March 2026 in connection with FIR No. 51 of 2026 alleging assault on the husband and son of an informant with sticks and an iron rod. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the FIR was filed two days after the alleged incident without explanation and contained only a vague, omnibus allegation against him, constituting a counter‑blast to a related case. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner had intentionally assaulted the victims and caused grievous injuries. The Court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the lack of specific allegations in the FIR, and the delay in filing, concluding that these factors warranted bail. Accordingly, the Court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding trial cooperation, evidence tampering, and verification of criminal antecedents.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged in the FIR
  • Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the lack of specific allegations justify granting bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • assault
  • FIR delay
  • counter‑blast
  • criminal antecedent
  • general allegation
  • conditions of bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38855 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2026 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Pawan Kumar Singh S/o Madan Singh R/O Village- Aguani Panchayat,
                 Aguani (Eastern Tola),Ward No -12 ,P.S- Parbatta, District- Khagaria

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                          Versus
                 The State of Bihar                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Vivekanand Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-06-2026                  Heard Mr.Vivekanand Singh, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner, Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the

                   informant and Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned A.P.P. for the

                   State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   11.03.2026 in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 51 of

                   2026, F.I.R. dated 07.02.2026 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 76, 109(1),

                   352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is the he assaulted

                   to the husband and son of the informant with sticks and iron rod.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                   submits that the present case is counter blast of Parbatta

                   P.S.Case No. 50 of 2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38855 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                            2/4




          submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the

          date of occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 05.02.2026 but the

          present FIR has been instituted on 07.02.2026 after delay of two

          days without giving any explanation of delay afterthought only

          to falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case. It appears

          from the FIR that due to some petty dispute the present

          occurrence has taken place. Although the petitioner is named in

          the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there

          is no specific allegation of any assault or overt-act attributed

          against the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus

          allegation against the petitioner in the FIR. Although some of

          the persons have received the injury which is grievous in nature

          and some persons have received the injury which is simplein

          nature and the police, after investigation, submitted the

          chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody

          since 11.03.2026.

                       5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned

          A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand,             have vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the

          petitioner is named in the FIR, apart from that, the petitioner,

          with wrong intention, has assaulted to the injured persons and

          some of the injuries are grievous in nature.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38855 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                            3/4




                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean

          antecedent, present case is counter blast of Parbatta P.S.Case

          No. 50 of 2026 and there is no specific allegation against the

          petitioner in the FIR rather there is general and omnibus

          allegation, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail

          on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

          A.C.J.M.-1st, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case

          No. 51 of 2026, with the following conditions:-

                       (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

          on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                       (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

          witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

          for cancellation of bail.

                       (III) And, further condition that the court below shall

          verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

          any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

          criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

          cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38855 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                                           4/4




                         acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                         shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                         verification.



                                                (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U          T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.