Patna High Court
Vishal Kumar @ Bhagdeo RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the trial court.
Summary
Vishal Kumar filed a criminal revision challenging the issuance of a process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. after cognizance was taken in a complaint. The Additional Sessions Judge set aside the Section 82 process, and the case reverted to the summon stage. The petitioner then applied for anticipatory bail, but counsel argued that, following a Supreme Court order in SLP (Cr.) No. 16221 of 2025, the petitioner should approach the trial court instead. The Patna High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the anticipatory bail application and directed him to appear before the trial court. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application is maintainable at the summon stage after the Section 82 process was set aside.
- Whether the petitioner should seek anticipatory bail or approach the trial court as per the Supreme Court precedent.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 82
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 82 Cr.P.C.
- criminal revision
- withdrawal of application
- High Court
- arrest apprehension
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40659 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1135 Year-2020 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Vishal Kumar @ Bhagdeo Ray S/o Late Ramanand Ray R/o Village -
Lakhanipur, Maudah, PS - Patepur, District - Vaishali and Village - Dighi
Kala, P.S - Sadar Thana, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deovind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Bishwash Vijeta, Advocate
Mr. Ram Naresh Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the O.P. No. 2.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner apprehends arrest since
cognizance was taken in the complaint and thereafter process
under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was also issued, but then petitioner
filed Criminal Revision No. 266 of 2026 assailing the order by
which process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued.
3. It is submitted that the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-XI, Patna set aside the order by which process under
Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued. It is next submitted that as of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40659 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
2/2
date, the case again stands at the stage of summon, on which
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2 submits
that since it has been submitted that the case now stands at the
stage of summon, as such, the petitioner, instead of moving this
Court seeking anticipatory bail, ought to have moved before the
learned Trial Court itself in terms of order dated 23.04.2026 in
Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 16221 of 2025 (Om
Prakash Chhawnika @ Om Prakash Vs. The State of
Jharkhand).
4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the
anticipatory bail application with liberty to the petitioner to
appear before the learned Trial Court in terms of the order of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court recorded hereinabove.
5. Permission is accorded.
6. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty
aforesaid.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.