Patna High Court
Kedar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions, under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
Petitioners Kedar Singh and Dewanti Devi sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita for alleged forcible entry, assault, disrobing, and theft of a gold chain. The FIR alleges they broke into an informant's house, misbehaved, assaulted, and stole jewellery, which the petitioners deny, claiming the case is false and stems from a land dispute linked to a pending title suit. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The Court examined the allegations and the petitioners' claim of falsehood, and, considering the circumstances, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, to be filed within eight weeks, under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a false or fabricated case arising from a land dispute.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 324(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482, 76
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false FIR
- land dispute
- assault
- theft
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8468 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-756 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Kedar Singh Son of Late Jagdish Mahto Resident of Village/ Mohalla-
Lakhnusarai, P.S.- Sasaram Town, District- Rohtas
2. Dewanti Devi Wife of Kedar Singh Resident of Village/ Mohalla-
Lakhnusarai, P.S.- Sasaram Town, District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinay Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2),
324(4), 76, 352, 351(2) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per F.I.R., petitioners are alleged to have
forcibly entered the house of informant by breaking the wall and
thereafter, petitioner no. 1 misbehaved with her and also
disrobed her, whereas, petitioner no. 2 assaulted informant by
dragging her hairs and also snatched gold chain worth Rs.
60,000/- from informant’s neck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
both parties are Gotiyas and due to land dispute, for which a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8468 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
title suit i.e. Title Suit No. 268 of 2025 is pending, this false &
concocted case has been lodged. No such occurrence, as alleged
in the F.I.R., has ever taken place.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the
above named petitioners, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Additional Sessions Judge – XIX, Rohtas at Sasaram in
connection with Sasaram (T) P.S. Case No. 756 of 2025, subject
to condition as laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S.,
2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
Checking your session…