Patna High Court

RAHUL KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court allowed the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS Tankuppa, Gaya) where he was alleged to have participated in an assault with an iron rod, as per FIR charges under multiple sections of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended he was innocent, claiming the incident stemmed from a scuffle over crackers and was a counter‑case to a complaint he had filed. He argued that the allegations were general and omnibus, lacking specific overt acts against him, and highlighted his clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. Considering the vague nature of the accusations, the existence of a counter‑case, and the petitioner's clean record, the court granted anticipatory bail, directing that if arrested within eight weeks he be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case where the allegations against the petitioner are general and omnibus
Whether the petitioner's clean antecedents and the existence of a counter‑case justify the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
general and omnibus accusation
clean antecedents
Section 482
criminal procedure
bail bond
counter‑case

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8696 of 2026

                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2025 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 RAHUL KUMAR S/o- Shiv Nandan Yadav Village- Ichoi PS- Tankuppa
                 District- Gaya Jee

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :        Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the

                   F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, abused

                   and assaulted informant and others with iron rod.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8696 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




          committed no offence. As a matter of fact, scuffle took place

          between the parties over bursting of crackers which led to maar-

          peet in which both sides sustained injuries. The present case is

          counter-blast of Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 2016 of 2025 which

          was lodged by petitioner’s side against informant and others.

          Moreover, allegation of assault is general and omnibus and no

          specific accusation of overt act has been alleged against this

          petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, case and

          counter-case between the parties and clean antecedents of the

          petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner is allowed.

                        7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8696 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       Magistrate-IV, Gaya Jee in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case

                       No. 217 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under

                       Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…