Patna High Court
Bikash Kumar @ Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to such relief.
Summary
Bikash Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory bail, fearing arrest in a 2020 FIR alleging offences under sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 324 and 34 of the IPC. The FIR arose from a land dispute in which the petitioner and his family were accused of assaulting the informant, Bhairolal Yadav, and his family. The petitioner argued that the procedural provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC had not been invoked and that the delay of over five years justified bail. The State contended that the FIR was filed in 2020 and the informant is now deceased, but made no substantive argument for bail. The Court considered the lapse of time and the nature of the allegations and rejected the anticipatory bail application, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks for trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the FIR is more than five years old and the petitioner has not invoked Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC.
- Whether the passage of time and the death of the informant affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 34, 341, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- delay
- CrPC
- IPC offences
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67889 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2020 Thana- SIKANDRA District- Jamui
======================================================
Bikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Son of Bishundeo Mistri Resident of Village
- Bardih, P.S.- Sikandra, District - Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 63 of 2020 for the offence
under sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code lodged on 26.03.2020 by the informant, Bhairolal Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that Bishundeo Mistri was creating problem on the agriculture
field and upon opposition, the named family members including
the petitioner came armed variously and assaulted him as also his
wife and sons. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there
is a case and counter-case, admittedly, there is a land dispute and
both the sides have suffered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67889 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/2
5. At this stage, Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP
submits that the case is of the year 2020, the petitioner is named in
the FIR and years later, the present petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though admittedly, the FIR is of the year 2020, the fact remains
that processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. were not
affected.
7. Learned State Counsel, Mr. Bharat Bhushan, submits
that although belatedly, it is now on record that the informant and
creator of the FIR, Bhairolal Yadav, is no more.
8. Considering all the aforesaid facts as also that the
petitioner has knocked the doors of the Court after more than five
years, in that background, it would be appropriate that he seeks
bail.
9. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
10. If, however, the petitioner surrenders within four
weeks, the concerned Court shall take up the matter and dispose it
of preferably on the same day.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…