Patna High Court
DHARMA SINGH @ BABU DHARMNATHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the petitioner was specifically accused of serious offences and the nature of the allegations warranted custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Dharma Singh, was named in an FIR alleging that he, along with co‑accused, assaulted the informant’s father‑in‑law with lathi, iron rod, brick and stone, leading to the victim’s death. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, claiming innocence, clean antecedents and that he had been falsely implicated. The State and the informant’s counsel opposed the bail, emphasizing the specific accusations and the gravity of the offences listed under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The Court examined the seriousness of the charges and the direct nature of the petitioner’s alleged involvement. Considering these factors, the Court concluded that granting anticipatory bail would be inappropriate. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who is specifically accused of serious offences under the B.N.S.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- serious offences
- B.N.S. sections
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73920 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2024 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria
======================================================
DHARMA SINGH @ BABU DHARMNATH S/O SURENDRA SINGH @
SUMAN SINHA R/o vill - Sondiha, Ward no. 16, P.s.- Pasraha, Distt.-
Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Amrit Raj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1),
115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that on
30.07.2024, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this
petitioner, stormed the house of informant, armed with lathi and
iron rod and started assaulting father-in-law of informant as a
result of which, he died during course of treatment.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73920 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026
2/2
committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean
antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and
submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific
accusation that he, along with co-accused Chandani Devi,
assaulted father-in-law of informant with brick and stone due to
which, he died during course of treatment.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…