Patna High Court
Anant Singh @ Anant Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient direct evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
Anant Singh was arrested in connection with a political rally incident where the deceased’s grandfather was allegedly assaulted and the deceased later died from blunt force injuries. The prosecution alleged that Singh fired at the victim’s heel and was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Singh’s counsel argued that the injury was non‑vital, the post‑mortem showed death due to crushing injuries, no firearm cartridges were recovered, and there were no eyewitnesses linking Singh to the shooting, contending the case was politically motivated. The State opposed bail, citing Singh’s extensive criminal record and the seriousness of the charges. Considering the cause of death, lack of direct evidence against Singh, his political rivalry, and the period of custody, the Court granted bail with monetary and procedural conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail pending trial for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act despite the alleged involvement in a homicide.
- Whether the lack of direct forensic evidence linking the petitioner to the fatal injury justifies bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 3(5), 351(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- political rivalry
- homicide
- intent
- post-mortem
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.835 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2025 Thana- BHADAUR District- Patna
======================================================
Anant Singh @ Anant Kumar Singh S/o Late Chandradeep @ Late
Chandradip Prasad @ Late Chandradip Singh, Resident of Village- Nadwan,
P.S.- Barh, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate
Ms. Shruti Singh, Advocate
Mr. Utkarsh Pathak, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, Advocate
Ms. Neha Kumari Singh, Advocate
Ms. Shipra Chandra, Advocate
Ms. Priya Rani, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Perused
the case diary.
2. In view of the minutes of Hon’ble the Chief Justice,
the matter has been listed before this Court.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in Bhadaur P.S. case No.
110 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
4. The prosecution case, in short, is that while the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.835 of 2026(5) dt.19-03-2026
2/6
informant and his grandfather were moving on the vehicle in the
rally of a political party, in the meantime, on the way, the
petitioner and his associates arrived and started abusing his
grandfather. When his grandfather opposed, co-accused Rajveer
Singh and Karamveer Singh took him out from his vehicle and
thereafter the petitioner fired upon him which hit on the heel of
the left leg due to which he fell down. Thereafter, co-accused
Chotan Singh and Kanjay Singh, having iron rod in their hands,
assaulted on his stomach, back and head and thereafter crushed
him with Thar vehicle and thereafter fled away. The deceased
died on the way to the hospital.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from
the conscious possession of the petitioner. Charge-sheet has
been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that in the FIR, allegation has been made that the
petitioner fired on the heel of the left leg of the deceased and
there is no any repetition, as such, there was no intention of the
petitioner to kill the deceased and also there was no intervening
circumstances as such. The injury sustained by the deceased is
also on the non-vital part of the body. In the post-mortem report,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.835 of 2026(5) dt.19-03-2026
3/6
the cause of death has not shown to be one which has been
caused by the firearm rather cause of death is by hard and blunt
substance due to hypovolemic shock caused by crushed injury
of lungs and heart which is alleged to have been committed by
the co-accused and not on the petitioner. Thus, the post-mortem
report does not corroborate the allegation made in the F.I.R.
Learned counsel, referring to paragraph No. 212 of the case
diary, states that the father of the informant has stated that while
he was in office, his son has informed him on mobile that his
father has died and has not mentioned the name of the petitioner
or anyone else. Further, the supervisory authority has given
specific instruction to take the statements and videography of
the persons who were deputed there. Their statements had been
recorded in paragraph Nos. 81 to 191 of the case diary and they
have stated that no one has seen the petitioner firing on the
deceased and further that no one was carrying any arms. No
independent witness has stated anything about firing made by
this petitioner. It is further submitted that no cartridges/empty
cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence. Learned
counsel further submits that the deceased was a hard-core
criminal. It is further submitted that another FIR has been
lodged for the same occurrence gives a different story. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.835 of 2026(5) dt.19-03-2026
4/6
petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2025 and has got sixteen
criminal antecedents in which he is on bail in all cases as stated
in paragraph 3 of the application. Further, in paragraph 3A of
the application, it is stated that the petitioner has been made
accused in fifty-one cases in which he is either acquitted or final
form has been submitted against him, although, in the case
diary, it has been shown that the petitioner has twenty-seven
criminal antecedents. Learned counsel submits that because of
the political rivalry, a number of cases were filed against the
petitioner for ulterior motive.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits
that specific allegation of firing on the heel of the left leg of the
deceased has been attributed to the petitioner. Learned counsel
for the informant further submits paragraph 174 of the case
diary reveals that the petitioner has altogether twenty-seven
criminal antecedents and, as such, he does not deserve the
privilege of bail. The post-mortem report specifically states that
cause of death is cardiorespiratory failure on account of
hypovolemic shock caused by crushed injury of lungs and heart
by hard and blunt substance. Police has submitted charge-sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.835 of 2026(5) dt.19-03-2026
5/6
against the petitioner under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190,
126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 109, 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act while
investigation is pending with regard to other co-accused.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, submissions made on behalf of both the parties,
allegation made in the F.I.R, charge-sheet being submitted,
cause of death on account of cardiorespiratory failure due to
shock caused by crushed injury of lungs and heart by hard and
blunt substance and not of firearm, several criminal antecedents
against the petitioner on account of his political rivalry and the
period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Bhadaur P.S. case
No. 110 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.835 of 2026(5) dt.19-03-2026
6/6
dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner will not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of the trial.
If any of the above conditions are violated, the Trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Pankaj/-
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…