Patna High Court
Pramod Sah @ Pramod Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate where the petitioner has a clean record, has cooperated with the investigation, and the alleged injury is simple, thus granting bail under Section 438 CrPC.
Summary
Petitioner Pramod Sah, accused of offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379 and 34, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest. He asserted a clean antecedent, cooperation with police, and that he was served notice under Section 41A CrPC without being arrested. The trial court had taken cognizance of the case under Section 307 IPC. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court considered the petitioner’s cooperation, the simple nature of the alleged injury, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for offences including attempt to murder and other IPC offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean record and cooperation with investigation justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are satisfied.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 41A, 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 34, 341, 379
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC offences
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- trial court cognizance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42746 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-589 Year-2022 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
Pramod Sah @ Pramod Kumar Sah S/O Mishrilal Sah R/O Vill.- Kalapatti
Barhi, P.S.- Phulparas, Dist.- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Rohit Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-07-2026 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 341, 323,
324, 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent and from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that Sanjay is alleged to have assaulted
the informant by farsa causing injury on palm of his hand while
petitioner is alleged to have assaulted by iron rod causing injury
on head and when he fell, all the accused assaulted him.
4. It is next submitted that no doubt informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42746 of 2026(2) dt.13-07-2026
2/3
suffered four injury but then the injury suffered on head has
been opined to be simple in nature, it is further submitted that
initially when the FIR was instituted the petitioner was given
notice under section 41(A) Cr.P.C. and the petitioner co-
operated with the police in the investigation and the police never
felt the need of arresting the petitioner thereafter chargesheet
came to be submitted but then the learned Trial Court differing
with police report also took cognizance under Section 307 of the
IPC hence petitioner apprehends his arrest. It is further
submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true
without admitting then the petitioner is alleged to have assaulted
the informant on his head which has been opined to be simple
and the blow is not alleged to have been repeated, even police
during the course of investigation did not arrest the petitioner as
he Co-operated with the police in the investigation.
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
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42746 of 2026(2) dt.13-07-2026
3/3
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 Phulparas P.S. Case No. 589 of 2022,
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)
vikram/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.