Patna High Court
Jitendra BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Jitendra Bind and his son Pappu Bind, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS Makhdumpur Case No. 346 of 2025) involving offences under the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Arms Act. The allegations stem from a family dispute that allegedly led to an assault with a pistol, resulting in injury and the seizure of two country‑made pistols and five live cartridges from the petitioners' house. The petitioners contend they have clean antecedents and were falsely implicated, distinguishing their case from a prior anticipatory bail order granted to unrelated persons. The State, through the A.P.P., argued that the facts and evidence, including the videographed seizure, warrant denial of bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, declined to extend anticipatory bail, finding the petitioners' involvement sufficient to justify denial. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Jitendra Bind and Pappu Bind in the pending criminal case under the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 35
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- illegal possession of firearms
- false implication
- Bihar National Security Act
- Arms Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3958 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
1. Jitendra Bind Son of Rajendra Bind Resident of village - Ilimpur, Ward No.-
9, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District - Jehanabad
2. Pappu Bind Son of Jitendra Bind Resident of village - Ilimpur, Ward No.- 9,
P.S.- Makhdumpur, District - Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the
BNS, 2023 as well as Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on account of dispute relating to money, Jitendra
and Mantu assaulted his uncle on 20.05.2025, accordingly, the
informant and his family members went to the house of Jitendra
to confront when Jitendra and his son Pappu abused and ousted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3958 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
them from their house and thereafter, on 21.05.2025, Jitendra,
Mantu, Nitish and Bigan came and Jitendra and Pappu assaulted
the informant and his family members by pistol causing injury
to Gorakh on head. Further, the police was informed and the
house of Jitendra was searched from where two country made
pistol along with five live cartridges were recovered and the
seizure was videographed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is further submitted that Nitish Bind along with
Bigan Bind and Manju Bind had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 71637 of 2025 and the
same came to be allowed vide order dated 10.11.2025 by this
Court on which learned A.P.P. submits that petitioners of Cr.
Misc. No. 71637 of 2025 were granted the anticipatory bail on
the ground that they were not related to Jitendra. In the present
case, Jitendra and his son Pappu are petitioner and from their
house, two country made pistol and five live cartridges have
been recovered and the seizure has been videographed, as such,
the case of the petitioners is not akin to the case of Nitish Bind
and others. It is next submitted that investigation in the case is
continuing.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3958 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection
with Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 346 of 2025 pending in the
Court of learned 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jehanabad/Successor Court.
6. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…