Patna High Court
Chandani DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court allowed the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Chandani Devi and Sanjay Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with PS case No.173 of 2025, which alleged offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault on an informant. They contended that they were falsely implicated, that Chandani has a clean record and Sanjay has only one prior conviction, and that the injuries to the informant do not substantiate the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The Court examined the allegations, the petitioners’ antecedents, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. Applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions, including surety, personal presence in court, and verification of antecedents. The order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the petitioners’ criminal antecedents and the nature of the alleged offences justify denial of bail
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are appropriate
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- false implication
- bail conditions
- assault
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6975 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Chandani Devi, W/O Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village- Amni, Ward No 07,
P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria.
2. Sanjay Yadav, S/O Raghunandan Yadav Resident of Village- Amni, Ward No
07, P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Roshan Kumar Mishra,Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Morkahi P.S. Case No.173 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352,
351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they
all, variously armed, had assaulted the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It has
further been submitted that petitioner no.1 is a lady and she has
been dragged only because the entire family has been implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6975 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
in the present case. It has next been submitted that the petitioner
no.2 happens to be the father of the three accused against whom
specific allegations of assault have been levelled. It has next
been submitted that at best the petitioner no.2 could be said to
be the order giver, however, the injuries sustained by the
informant do not corroborate the allegations levelled in the FIR.
It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner no.1 has clean
antecedent while petitioner no.2 has one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Morkahi P.S. Case No.173 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6975 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive
dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by
the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed
their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take
step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners.
However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose
of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…