Patna High Court
Inder Bhushan Pandit @ Indu Bhushan PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the petitioner was specifically and directly accused of serious violent offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Inder Bhushan Pandit, was named in an FIR alleging that he, along with other accused, brutally assaulted the informant’s parents during a land‑dispute settlement, resulting in the father’s death. He sought anticipatory bail, claiming innocence and a clean antecedent, asserting that he was falsely implicated. The State and the informant’s counsel opposed the bail, emphasizing the specific accusations and the seriousness of the offences listed under the B.N.S. The court examined the nature of the allegations, noting that the petitioner was directly charged with multiple violent offences. Considering the gravity of the charges and the direct involvement alleged, the court found no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused of offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 103(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the specific and grave nature of the accusations justifies denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- violent offences
- B.N.S.
- section 352
- section 126
- section 115
- section 118
- section 109
- section 103
- section 351
- section 3
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8403 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Inder Bhushan Pandit @ Indu Bhushan Pandit S/o Ram Jatan Pandir Resident
of Village- Sarari, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Praween Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Prabhu Narayan Prabhakar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 11-02-2026 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 126(2),
115(2), 118(2), 109, 103(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that due to old land
dispute, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this
petitioner, called informant’s father and mother to settle the
matter through panchayati and in course of panchayati between
the parties, there was hot talk between informant’s father and
co-accused Umed Lal Pandit and thereafter, all the accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8403 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
persons dragged them in the house and brutally assaulted. It is
specifically alleged that co-accused Umed Lal Pandit pressed
the neck of informant’s father, whereas this petitioner assaulted
on the chest of informant’s father with brick and co-accused
Uma Shankar Pandit, Ravai Kumar Pandit and Arun Pandit were
catching hands & legs of informant’s father, on account of
which, father of informant died on spot and informant’s mother
sustained some injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on account of long
standing land dispute, petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case. 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 other accused persons, assaulted
father and mother of informant due to which father of informant
died on the spot.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8403 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…