Patna High Court
Somnath Keshari @ Somnatu Keshari @ Somantu KeshariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to bond and surety conditions, with the trial court empowered to cancel the bail if cooperation is not forthcoming.
Summary
The Patna High Court entertained an anticipatory bail application filed by Somnath Keshari, who was implicated in a FIR (Sherghati PS Case No.1132 of 2022) for offences under IPC Sections 341, 323, 506 and 384. The petitioner argued that the earlier anticipatory bail petition had been dismissed because the offences carried a punishment of less than seven years and that the police had failed to issue a Section 41A notice, instead processing the case mechanically under Section 82. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner had prior criminal antecedents and that the FIR, though delayed, was bona fide. The Court, relying on a recent Division Bench judgment that anticipatory bail is maintainable for offences with punishment up to seven years, held that the petitioner was not likely to abscond and could cooperate with the investigation. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, naming the petitioner’s father as one bailor and reserving the right of the trial court to cancel the bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail is maintainable for offences punishable with imprisonment of seven years or less.
- Whether the failure to issue a Section 41A notice and the mechanical application of Section 82 affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal record and the nature of the allegations justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner is likely to cooperate with the investigation or abscond.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41A, 82
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 384, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC
- Section 41A
- Section 82
- criminal intimidation
- extortion
- false implication
- bail conditions
- Gaya district
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63387 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1132 Year-2022 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
Somnath Keshari @ Somnatu Keshari @ Somantu Keshari Son of Ramdev
Keshari Resident of Village - Dobhi, P.S.- Sherghati (Dobhi), Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 10-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest
in Sherghati (Dobhi) P. S. Case No.1132 of 2022 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 506 and 384 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner earlier had moved before this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.59179 of 2024 and the
same came to be disposed of by an order dated 05.09.2024 in
terms of order dated 13.02.2024 in Cr. Misc No.3536 of 2024
(Naushad Ansari vs. the State of Bihar), since the offences for
which the instant FIR has been instituted carries punishment of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63387 of 2025(7) dt.10-02-2026
2/5
less than seven years. It is further submitted that the police in
compliance of the order dated 05.09.2024, did not issue notice
under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C. despite petitioner
representing before the SHO and the concerned Superintendent
of Police, in terms of order dated 05.09.2024 in Cr. Misc.
No.59179 of 2024 rather process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. in a
mechanical manner was sought, as such, the instant anticipatory
bail application was filed. It is submitted that after filing of the
instant anticipatory bail application, the case was taken up on
17.10.2025 and the SHO and the Investigating Officer of the
case were directed to remain present in the Court on 31.10.2025.
It is next submitted that on 31.10.2025, the SHO and the
Investigating Officer of the case were present and they
submitted after going through the order dated 17.10.2025 that
they have joined recently and that a mistake has been committed
by the earlier Investigating Officer and all endeavours would be
made to rectify the said mistake. It is thus submitted that
thereafter process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was recalled and the
petitioner was given notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C.
but then it is submitted that recently the Hon’ble Division Bench
of this Court in Cr. Misc. No.65700 of 2025 (Md. Raja Vs. State
of Bihar & Another) has held by judgment dated 16.12.2025 that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63387 of 2025(7) dt.10-02-2026
3/5
anticipatory bail is maintainable with respect to offences which
carries punishment of 7 years and less. It is further submitted
that in the instant case, the petitioner has been falsely implicated
by the informant since they are having dispute from before. It is
next submitted that informant alleges that on 04.12.2022 at
about 8.30 P.M. he went to attend a reception ceremony, when
he was intercepted by five accused persons including the
petitioner, out of which, four accused were unknown and their
faces were masked and the accused persons assaulted him by
means of fist and slaps and petitioner even tried to strangulate
him and thereafter threatened to withdraw Dobhi P.S. Case
No.471/2019, which informant had instituted against the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
allegation does not inspire confidence, for the reason that it does
not appear probable that five accused would have intercepted
the informant only for threatening to withdraw the case. It is
also submitted that when four accused are alleged to have been
masked, why the petitioner would have shown his face to the
informant. It is next submitted that petitioner will not abscond
rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
It is further submitted that no doubt petitioner has antecedent of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63387 of 2025(7) dt.10-02-2026
4/5
five cases but then one case has been instituted by the informant
and allegation as alleged in the FIR is also to be appreciated. It
is next submitted that FIR even came to be instituted after a
delay of two days, as occurrence is dated 04.12.2022 and the
FIR came to be instituted on 06.12.2022.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
ACJM-1st, Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Sherghati
(Dobhi) P. S. Case No.1132 of 2022.
7. Further, one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be
his father, namely, Ramdev Keshari.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner
despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63387 of 2025(7) dt.10-02-2026
5/5
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…