Patna High Court
Umesh JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to cash bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Umesh Jha, sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 171 of 2025 alleging offences under Sections 281, 125(a), 125(b) and 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The incident involved the petitioner and a co‑accused verbally abusing an informant who was riding a motorcycle; the co‑accused then dashed the informant's motorcycle, causing injury to the informant's leg. The FIR was lodged five days after the incident, and the petitioner argued that the delay was unexplained and that he was only a pillion rider who merely exhorted the co‑accused. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s two prior criminal antecedents. The Court held that while antecedents are relevant, the charge against the petitioner was limited to exhortation, not direct assault, and therefore granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite his criminal antecedents
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence (exhortation versus assault) warrants denial of bail
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR affects the bail application
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- delay in FIR
- exhortation
- motorcycle incident
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83588 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Umesh Jha S/O Late Kapileshwar Jha R/O Village - Sanha, P.S- S. Kamal,
Dist.- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sabal Kumar jha, Adv.
Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Anshul, Sr. Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sbal Kumar Jha, learned Advocate
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State. The informant is represented
through Mr. Anshul, learned Senior Advocate.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025, registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 281, 125(a), 125(b) and
109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2025.
3. On the fateful day while the informant was
returning to his home on his motorcycle, in the meanwhile, co-
accused Anil Kumar Jha @ Babu Saheb and this petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83588 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/4
had been coming on a motorcycle started abusing and on the
exhortation made by the petitioner, co-accused Anil Kumar Jha
@ Babu Saheb dashed the motorcycle of the informant, due to
which the petitioner sustained serious injuries in the fingers of
his leg. The informant also alleged that the petitioner works as a
broker of Indira Awaas Scheme and accused of criminal case.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that admittedly the alleged occurrence took
place on 07.06.2025, but the present FIR came to be instituted
on 12.06.2025, without there being any explanation for delay.
Even if for the sake of argument, the allegation is taken to be
true, it is the admitted position that the petitioner was a pillion
rider and it is co-accused Anil Kumar Jha who was riding the
motorcycle and dashed the same. In fact, it was an unfortunate
accident, but, later on, on account of some previous dispute, in
order to wreck vengeance and put pressure, the present FIR
came to be instituted. The petitioner undertakes that he will fully
cooperate in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
and the learned Senior Advocate for the informant vehemently
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the
petitioner was fortunate enough that he sustained grievous
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83588 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
3/4
injury only in his leg, however he could have suffered some
more injuries. All the more, the petitioner bears two criminal
antecedent and for this reason alone the petitioner does not
deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered the learned Advocate for the
respective parties and taking note of the materials available on
record, this Court is of the opinion that the criminal antecedent of a
person shall be a relevant ground for consideration of the bail,
however, the accusation levelled in the FIR is also required to be
looked into in the case at hand. There is no such specific allegation of
causing assault, rather the allegation against the petitioner is levelled
to the extent of exhortation which led to causing dashing of the
motorcycle of the petitioner, leading to some unfortunate injuries on
non-vital part of the body. In view of the aforesaid facts, let the
petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest
or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection
with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83588 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
4/4
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of
the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U T
Checking your session…