Patna High Court
Prabhu Shankar Roy @ GoluversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
Petitioner Prabhu Shankar Roy sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 329(3), 118(1), 333, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. He contended that the informant’s testimony was contradictory, that the alleged assault on 15‑Oct‑2025 could not have occurred after the informant had already testified on 13‑Oct‑2025, and that the FIR was lodged three days later, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The Court examined these submissions, noted the inconsistencies and delay, and exercised its power under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. to grant anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions. The order was made to protect the petitioner from possible arrest while the trial proceeds.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances alleged.
- Whether the inconsistencies in the informant’s testimony and delay in filing the FIR justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 118(1), 126(2), 329(3), 333, 3(5), 61(2)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- FIR delay
- Criminal Procedure Code
- B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
- sections of BNS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39945 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-434 Year-2025 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Prabhu Shankar Roy @ Golu @ Prabhu Shanker S/o Satish Roy @ Satish
Ray Resident of Village - Bithauli, P.S.- Baheri, District - Darbhanga, Bihar -
847201
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Shama Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Surya Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
329(3), 118(1), 333, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that he deposed in Sessions Trial No. 194 of 2021 on 13.10.2025
in which petitioner is an accused. It is further alleged that on
15.10.2025, at 11:00 p.m., while he was sleeping, petitioner
along with unkown accused persons came and petitioner tried to
assault him by sword but informant wokeup when an unknown
accused tried to assault him by katta but the informant
retaliated, thus, the accused persons fled away. It is next alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39945 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
that earlier also attempt was made on life of witnesses in the
aforesaid case and their shop burnt. It is also alleged that the
police was informed.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that
informant himself alleges that he had deposed in the sessions
trial on 13.10.2025, as such, there was no occasion for the
petitioner to assault him on 15.10.2025 as no useful purpose
would have been served. It is next submitted that had any
attempt on the informant been made prior to 13.10.2025 in that
event some credibility to the allegation could have been
assigned. It is also submitted that FIR also came to be instituted
on 18.10.2025 i.e. after a delay of three days which further casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when informant
alleges that the police were informed and they came to the place
of occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39945 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor
Court in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 434 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.