Patna High Court
Pawan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted as the FIR does not specifically allege the petitioners' involvement and the allegations are general in nature.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers-in-law, were named in an FIR for assault, robbery and other offences arising from a property dispute, but the FIR contained only general, omnibus allegations against them. They filed an anticipatory bail application, claiming innocence and that the case was filed to harass them. The State opposed the bail, arguing the accused had assaulted the informant. The court examined the lack of specific allegations and the nature of the FIR, and concluded that the petitioners were falsely implicated. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, subject to standard conditions. The bail order required a bond, sureties, and compliance with conditions such as appearing before the trial court and not tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the FIR contains only general, omnibus allegations against the accused.
- Whether the petitioners are specifically implicated under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Applicability of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 125(a), 125(b), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 74
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- omnibus FIR
- property dispute
- assault
- robbery
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6739 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2025 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Pawan Kumar S/o Rabindra Prasad @ Rabindra Ram R/o - Mayee, P.S -
Rahui, District - Nalanda
2. Rahul Kumar S/o Rabindra Prasad @ Rabindra Ram R/o - Mayee, P.S -
Rahui, District - Nalanda
3. Dilip Kumar S/o Rabindra Prasad @ Rabindra Ram R/o - Mayee, P.S -
Rahui, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Rahui P.S. Case No.116 of 2025, F.I.R dated
24.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 125(a), 125(b), 303(2),
109 and 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, as per the FIR is
that the informant, Sagina Devi, alleged that on 20.02.2025 at
about 8:30 PM, her mother-in-law Dharmshala Devi and devars
Pawan Kumar and Dilip Kumar entered her room and assaulted
her with bricks and a hammer, causing injuries to her knee and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6739 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
waist, and also snatched her golden chain, earrings, and
Rs.5,000 in cash. On her alarm, her husband arrived to rescue
her, whereupon the accused persons assaulted him with an iron
rod, causing injuries to his head, hands, legs, and feet. The
occurrence is stated to have arisen out of a dispute relating to
partition of property. On hearing the alarm, local persons
assembled and the injured were taken to Rahui Hospital, from
where they were referred to Pawapuri Hospital, and thereafter
treated at Shivam Emergency, Devi Sarai, Bihar Sharif. The
delay in lodging the FIR is explained due to ongoing medical
treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
present case and the petitioners are brothers-in-law of the
informant. The F.I.R. is said to have been lodged against six
named persons, including these petitioners but there is no
specific allegation against these petitioners rather the allegations
are general and omnibus in nature. It has further been submitted
that the present case has been lodged due to a land dispute
regarding partition of property and these petitioners are man of
means and are ready to abide by the terms and conditions
imposed in case of privilege of anticipatory bail is extended to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6739 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
them.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application and submits that all the accused
persons are said to have assaulted the informant due to which
the injuries are said to have been sustained by him.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in
the present case and there is nothing specific alleged against
these petitioners rather the allegations are general and omnibus
in nature. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 A.C.J.M. 3rd Nalanda at Biharshariff,
in connection with Rahui P.S. Case No.116 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6739 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…