Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kameshwar Prasad GuptaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Kameshwar Prasad Gupta, sought bail fearing arrest in Raxaul Police Station Case No. 286 of 2025, arising from an FIR dated 24‑06‑2025 alleging assault, injury to the eye, hair‑pulling and an attempted shooting of an informant. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, committed these offences under several sections of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to an admitted land dispute with the informant, who is his agnate, and that the injuries were simple. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, highlighting three prior criminal antecedents of the petitioner. The Court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and other safeguards.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the alleged offences and his prior criminal antecedents
  • Whether the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S. are applicable in this case

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 B.N.S.
  • criminal antecedent
  • false complaint
  • land dispute
  • assault
  • injury

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88266 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2025 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Kameshwar Prasad Gupta S/O Harilal Sah R/O Village- Ward No. 1 Bada
                 Pareuwa, Near Hanuman Temple, P.S.- Raxaul, District- East Champaran
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Alexander Ashok, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-01-2026                   Heard Mr. Alexander Ashok, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 286 of 2025, F.I.R. dated

                   24.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 119(1), 329(3), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 74, 76, 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S.

                                3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other

                   co-accused persons are alleged to have abused and assaulted the

                   informant which caused injury upon right eye and the allegation

                   against this petitioner is of dragged her catching her hair

                   resulting and also ordered to shot her.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in

                   the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88266 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                            2/3




          informant are agnates to each other and there is admitted land

          dispute between the parties and due to admitted land dispute, the

          present occurrence took place and the informant has filed a false

          case against this petitioner. There is case and counter case.

          Although, the informant has sustained injuries and the injury

          report of the informant suggest that all the injuries are simple in

          nature.

                       5.   Learned       Additional       Public   Prosecutor   has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

          submits that the petitioner carries three criminal antecedents

          other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of

          paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in

          the pending matters.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or

          surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days

          from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

          Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in

          connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 286 of 2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88266 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with

                      other following conditions:

                                   i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                      properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                      and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                      on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                      reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                   ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                      witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                      for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                      any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.


                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

Ranjeet/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.