Patna High Court
Dinesh SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Sharma, was accused in Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 446 of 2025 of multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault, robbery and other violent crimes. He contended that the allegations were false and stemmed from a long‑standing land dispute, asserting that the FIR was lodged 119 days after the alleged incident and that he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court examined the delay, the nature of the allegations, and the petitioner’s claim of false implication, and applied Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. It granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties, and conditions of personal appearance and cooperation, while noting that the order’s observations would not affect the trial. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC read with Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in view of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
- Whether the delay of 119 days in filing the FIR warrants denial of bail
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication due to a land dispute affects the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 324(4), 329(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- land dispute
- delay in FIR
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- assault
- robbery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8395 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-446 Year-2025 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Dinesh Sharma S/O Sito Sharma R/o - Chaura Ramchandrapur Ward No 5,
P.s. - Bibhutipur, Samastipur, Bihar 848101
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 446 of 2025
registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2),
329(4), 109(1), 76, 303(2), 324(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to
have attacked the informant and others armed with a pistol. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8395 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/4
has specifically been alleged that the petitioner had hit the
grand-daughter of the informant with the butt of the pistol. The
further allegations against the petitioners are of snatching gold
ornaments and other valuable items.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case along with
eleven other accused persons. It has been submitted that no
such incident as alleged has occurred and on account of long
pending land dispute between the parties, the present case has
been lodged with an intention to implicate the entire family of
the petitioner. It has further been submitted that there is general
and omnibus allegation of assault and as far as the assault upon
the grand-daughter of the informant is concerned, the same was
found to be simple in nature, as would be evident from the
perusal of the impugned order itself. It has next been submitted
that, admittedly, the date of occurrence is said to be 17.07.2025
while the F.I.R. was lodged on 12.11.2025, i.e., after a delay of
119 days. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has
clean antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8395 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/4
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the
case is pending in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 446
of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the
following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8395 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
4/4
of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…