Patna High Court
Praveen KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 438(2) CrPC despite the serious nature of the charges, as the petitioners have a clean antecedent and the allegations appear to be motivated by a property dispute.
Summary
The petitioners, Praveen Kumar and Jitendra Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several IPC sections for alleged assault, robbery and attempt to murder. They claimed to have a clean record and alleged that the informant, an agnate with whom they have a property dispute, falsely implicated them. The informant alleged that the petitioners assaulted him with a lathi, causing a simple head injury, and participated in a robbery. The petitioners argued that the injury was minor and no medical report was on record, contending the case was motivated by the land dispute. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, and imposed standard conditions for the duration of the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438(2) CrPC in a case involving serious offences under the IPC.
- Whether the petitioners are falsely implicated due to a property dispute with the informant.
- Whether the alleged injury is simple and sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- false implication
- property dispute
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84153 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2020 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================
1. Praveen Kumar S/o Sipahi Rai @ Sipahi Ray Resident of - Tata Colony, P.S
- Maner, District - Patna
2. Jitendra Kumar S/o Sharda Rai Resident of - Tata Colony, P.S - Maner,
District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Roona, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148,
149, 341, 325, 379 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on 10.04.2019, the accused persons including the
petitioners came to his house and Praveen and Jitendra Kumar
(petitioners) assaulted him with lathi causing injury on head and
thereafter the other accused persons also assaulted and snatched
his chain and took cash from the house, it is next alleged that on
account of assault, informant was taken to the PHC from where
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84153 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
he was referred to the PMCH for treatment and when he came to
PMCH, he came to know that the accused persons had earlier
assaulted his brother at the block office and thereafter they had
come to his house and assaulted him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that petitioners and the
informant are agnates and are having dispute relating to
property. It is also submitted that no doubt it is alleged that
petitioners assaulted the informant by lathi causing injury on
head but then the allegation of assault is not specific, as the
informant alleges that both petitioners assaulted him by lathi on
head. It is further submitted that petitioners are not criminals
and on account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is
alleged to have been taken place and the injury suffered by the
injured has been opined to be simple, on which, the learned APP
submits that neither the injury report is on record nor the order
impugned discusses about the injury, on which, the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that
based on instruction, it is being submitted that the injury
suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple in nature.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84153 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Maner
P.S. Case No. 40 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…