Patna High Court
Baban Singh @ Baban YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions, finding no specific allegation against them and noting the precedent of bail to a co‑accused.
Summary
Petitioners Baban Singh and his son Uttam Singh were arrested on 12 March 2026 in connection with an excise case alleging arson and assault on a family and neighbours, with charges under several sections of the Bihar Non‑Specific (BNS) Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners set fire to a cow‑shade and assaulted the victims with sticks, causing injuries including a fractured finger. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated due to a prior petty dispute and that the FIR contains only vague, omnibus allegations without specific acts against them. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents. The court noted the lack of specific allegations, the grant of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused (Amit Kumar), and ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences and alleged prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the FIR contains specific allegations sufficient to deny bail
- Whether the grant of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused influences the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Bihar Non‑Specific (BNS) Act — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- arson
- prior criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39955 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2026 Thana- RAJPUR District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Baban Singh @ Baban Yadav son of Late Vishwanath Singh Resident of
Village- Baligaon PS -Rajpur Dist -Rohtas
2. Uttam Singh Son of Baban Singh @ Baban Yadav Resident of Village-
Baligaon PS -Rajpur Dist -Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, learned counsel for
the petitioners as well as Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seek bail who are custody since
12.03.2026 in connection with Rajpur Excise P.S. Case No. 44
of 2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 303(2), 109, 352 and 3(5) of BNS.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant
alleged that on 10.03.2026 petitioner no.1, Baban Singh blazed
fire in Gaushala (cow-shade) of informant for which she
informed police thereafter Baban Singh and his associates
assaulted the entire family with danda, rod and Rama and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39955 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
2/4
further states that the Baban singh and his son pressed to
withdraw earlier case. That the Prosecutrix further alleged that
her younger daughter-in-law Gita Devi was assaulted and her
gold chain and Jitiya was broken and elder brother of Baban
Singh namely Uttam Kumar Singh, who is petitioner no.2
snatched chain and her elder son Raju sustained head injury and
14 stitches were given, head of younger son was torn due to
assault of danda, Puja and Muskan who were neighbour of
informant also assaulted.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and they falsely been implicated in the
present case. It appears from the FIR that due to some petty
dispute (previous dispute) the present occurrence has taken
place and there is case and counter case between the parties.
From bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific
allegation of assault or overt act against the petitioners rather
there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused
persons including the petitioners and injury inflicted upon the
injured persons is simple in nature except one injury which is
grievous in nature due to fracture in finger. He next submits that
similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Amit Kumar has
been granted the privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39955 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
3/4
06.05.2026 in Cr. Misc. No. 30653 of 2026. The police after
investigation submitted charge-sheet against the petitioners and
the petitioners are in custody since 12.03.2026.
5. The learned learned Additional Public Prosecutor
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners
and submits that both the petitioners carry one criminal
antecedent other than the present one.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
there is no specific allegation of assault or overt against the
petitioners and similarly situated co-accused person has been
granted the privilege of bail by this Court, let the petitioners,
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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Class, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Rajpur Excise
P.S. Case No. 44 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39955 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
4/4
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 petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.