Patna High Court
Binjay PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to a bond, sureties, and conditions, given his clean antecedent and the circumstances of the dispute.
Summary
The petitioner, Binjay Pandey, was arrested on 2 July 2025 in connection with a case arising from a land dispute, alleged to have assaulted an informant’s brother with a spade and other weapons, leading to charges under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner pleaded clean antecedent and claimed false implication, arguing the incident was a spontaneous act without intent to kill. The prosecution opposed bail, emphasizing the grievous nature of the injuries and specific allegations against the petitioner. The court considered the petitioner’s clean record, the background of a land dispute, and the circumstances of the assault, and decided to grant bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions. The bail order includes requirements for trial cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being charged under sections 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 303(2) and 352 of the Indian Penal Code
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the context of a land dispute justify the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- land dispute
- clean antecedent
- criminal trial
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88312 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-349 Year-2025 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Binjay Pandey Son of Late Thag pandey Resident of Village - Noneya
Sakaldipi Tola, Ward no. - 4, P.S. - Paharpur, Dist. - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
02.07.2025 in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 349 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 28.06.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1),
303(2), 352 of the B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
co-accused persons are alleged to have surrounded the
informant and his brother and abused them on protest they took
the informant’s brother on their door and petitioner gave a spade
blow on his head. Other co-accused persons also assaulted him
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88312 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
with garasi due to which he sustained injury on his right hand.
Petitioner also assaulted him with farsa on his back.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. itself
that the petitioner and informant are agnates to each other and
there is admitted land dispute between them. Although, the
specific allegation against this petitioner is that he along with
co-accused person Gulshan Kumar assaulted the informant’s
brother on his head and the petitioner again assaulted informant
brother on his back. Learned counsel further submits that the
occurrence had took place at the spur of the moment and there
was no intention to kill anyone and in the background of land
dispute, the present occurrence had taken place. He further
submits that the police after investigation, submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 02.07.2025.
5. Learned APP for the informant and learned APP for
the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and fairly submits that there is specific allegation
against the petitioner in the F.I.R. and the injury report of the
injured is grievous in nature.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88312 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and in the background of land
dispute, the present occurrence had taken place, let the
petitioner, above named, 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 Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 349 of 2025, with the
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, his/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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88312 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
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
Checking your session…