Patna High Court
Sigheshwar RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that, given the simple nature of the injury, the petitioner’s clean record and the circumstances of a sudden shop‑construction dispute, anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC was warranted.
Summary
The petitioner, Sigheshwar Rai, was named among thirteen accused in a case arising from a dispute over the construction of a grocery shop, alleged to have involved verbal abuse and assault with a bottle causing a simple injury to Saurabh Kumar. He contended that he was implicated solely because of his familial relation to a co‑accused and that he has no prior criminal record. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The court considered the nature of the alleged offence, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the fact that the incident stemmed from a sudden commercial dispute. It concluded that the injury was minor and the circumstances did not justify denial of bail. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether the simple nature of the alleged injury and lack of prior criminal record justify granting bail.
- Whether the involvement of multiple co‑accused and the commercial dispute context affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- simple injury
- shop construction dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7429 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2025 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sigheshwar Rai Son of Late Kamleshwar Rai Resident of Bardiha Turki, P.S.-
Patepur, District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(1),
115(2), 118(1), 74, 303(2), 109, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. Allegation in the first information report is that on
account of some dispute with regard to construction of a shop
for the grossery business by the informant, the accused persons
being 13 in number including the present petitioner indulged in
abuses and assault.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it
would be evident from the first information report itself that as
many as 13 persons of the family have been made an accused in
the case which related to a dispute between the informant and
the petitioner with regard to causing obstruction in construction
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7429 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
of shop whereas the shop of co-accused Ashok Rai was already
running and there was some business rivalry between them and
as a matter of fact, the petitioner has been made an accused in
this case only on account of the fact that he happens to be a
relative of said Ashok Rai. The allegation against him is also
confined to hitting on the back of Saurabh Kumar with one
bottle and the injury caused to the said Saurabh Kumar is simple
in nature as indicative in the bail rejection order itself. It is
further submitted that there is a cross case even at the side of the
petitioner lodged by the co-accused Ashok Rai.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for anticipatory bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the fact that on account of a
sudden dispute relating to construction of shop the occurrence is
said to have taken place coupled with the fact that the injury
attributable to the petitioner is simple in nature, let the above
named petitioner, who has no criminal antecedent, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within
a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7429 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
learned court below where the case is pending/successor court
in connection with Patepur P.S. Case No. 299 of 2025, subject to
the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…