Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Azad SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted because the petitioners have clean antecedents and the allegations do not specifically implicate them, subject to compliance with Section 482(2) CrPC.

Summary

The petitioners—Azad Sah, Sujeet Sah, Jagmohan Sah and Sukhchandra Sah—applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 341, 323, 325, 324, 308, 379 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, arising from a land‑dispute‑related altercation that allegedly resulted in assault and theft. They contended that they have clean antecedents, were falsely implicated by the informant, and that the FIR does not specifically allege their participation in the grievous injuries. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to the petitioners surrendering within six weeks, furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties, and complying with conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The order also warned that the trial court may cancel the bail if the petitioners fail to cooperate with the investigation. The application was therefore allowed.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under the facts of the case
  • Whether the FIR specifically implicates the petitioners in the alleged offences
  • Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code can be imposed on anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • land dispute
  • assault
  • theft
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Section 482
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40586 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2024 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR District-
                                                       Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
           1.     Azad Sah Son of Jagmohan Sah Resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Sadar,
                  District- Darbhanga.
           2.    Sujeet Sah @ Sujeet Kumar Son of Jagmohan Sah Resident of Village-
                 Gopalpur, P.S.- Sadar, District- Darbhanga.
           3.    Jagmohan Sah Son of Late Jibachh Sah Resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.-
                 Sadar, District- Darbhanga.
           4.    Sukhchandra Sah Son of Sikandar Sah Resident of Village- Simrari, Ward
                 No. -5, P.S.- Jainagar, District- Madhubani.

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Sunil Kumar Karn
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-07-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest

                   in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections

                   341, 323, 325, 324, 308, 379 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that there is a land dispute with her younger father in-law,

                   hence on 12.03.2024 at 7.00 A.M. her brother in-law (Nandosi)

                   Ranjit and Pulkit along with Vikash went to the house of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40586 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
                                            2/3




          Jagmohan to sort out the dispute, when named accused persons

          including the petitioners came and Azad assaulted Dipak by lathi

          causing injury on head, further Ranjit suffered fracture of left

          hand. It is next alleged that Ajit and Azad dashed Ganga in the

          courtyard and assaulted her and took away Rs.15,000/-.

                       4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

          petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is further submitted that on account of dispute

          relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is

          further submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in

          the FIR, it would manifest that specific allegation of assaulting

          Dipak is against Azad, but then, Dipak has suffered simple injury.

          It is next submitted that no doubt, Ranjit’s injury has been opined

          to be grievous, but then from perusal of the allegations as alleged

          in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation of

          assaulting Ranjit is alleged. It is also submitted that petitioners are

          not criminals and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the

          petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the

          investigation to prove their innocence.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes

          the anticipatory bail application.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40586 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
                                                           3/3




                         event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

                         within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on

                         anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.

                         10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 Sadar P. S.

                         Case No.146 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under

                         Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                                      7. The application stands allowed.

                                      8. However, it is made clear that in the event, if any

                         application is filed by the Investigating Officer before the learned

                         trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioners, despite giving

                         assurance to this Court, are not cooperating in the investigation or

                         are not presenting themself as and when required, the learned trial

                         Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners

                         after recording reasons.

                                      9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned

                         Police Station through the learned trial Court.


                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

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.