Patna High Court

JAY SINGH @ JAY KUMAR SINGHversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner faced a direct allegation of assault.

Summary

Jay Singh was implicated in a FIR (Malahi PS Case No.146 of 2025) alleging assault on an informant during a land dispute, with charges under Sections 109(1), 126(2), 189(2), 303(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, that the allegations were vague and that he had no criminal record. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, emphasizing the specific allegation that the petitioner assaulted the informant with an iron rod causing injuries. The Court, noting the direct allegation of assault, declined to grant anticipatory bail. However, the Court indicated that if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks and applies for regular bail, the application will be considered on its merits.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when there is a direct allegation of assault under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Whether a general and omnibus allegation suffices to deny anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 126(2), 189(2), 303(2), 61(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
assault
land dispute
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3963 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 JAY SINGH @ JAY KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE CHANDESHWAR SINGH
                 R/o vill - Bharwaliya, P.s.- Malahi, Distt.- East Champaran



                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Malahi P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025, instituted for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 126(2), 189(2),

                   303(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                               3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused

                   persons gathered at the door of the informant and started hurling

                   abuses in the backdrop of a land dispute. It is further alleged

                   that the accused persons assaulted the informant by means of

                   stick, iron rod, axe and tanguli due to which he sustained
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3963 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
                                            2/3




          injuries on his head and nose.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to

          previous land dispute between the parties. He further contended

          that both the parties are close agnates. Learned counsel for the

          petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has

          been made against the             petitioner. No specific overt act is

          alleged against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of

          the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that

          as per FIR, this petitioner assaulted the informant by iron rod

          due to which he sustained injuries on his nose and right

          shoulder.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, there being direct allegation against the petitioner of

          assaulting the informant with iron rod, this Court is not inclined

          to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                       7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                       8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

          learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3963 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own

                     merit without being prejudiced by this order.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…