Patna High Court
Nitesh GiriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, granting it subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, four brothers named Giri, were implicated in Mahua Police Station Case No. 742 of 2025 for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act, 1959, including alleged murder, assault, and illegal possession of arms. They applied for anticipatory bail, claiming the allegations were false and stemmed from personal enmity, and highlighted their own criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the facts and the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions such as surety, personal appearance in court, and verification of antecedents. The order emphasized that any observation made therein would not affect the trial. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act, 1959.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.S. are satisfied for granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2), 76
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8867 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-742 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Nitesh Giri, Son of Santosh Giri, All Are Resident of Village - Mirjanagar,
P.S. - Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali
2. Vikash Giri Son of Umesh Giri @ Umeshanand Giri All Are Resident of
Village - Mirjanagar, P.S. - Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali
3. Chandan Giri Son of Vimal Giri All Are Resident of Village - Mirjanagar,
P.S. - Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali
4. Pankaj Giri Son of Late Surendra Giri All Are Resident of Village -
Mirjanagar, P.S. - Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shanti Bhushan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 21-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Mahua P.S. Case No.742 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 76, 303(2), 352,
351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections
25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that while he was sitting at his door, 10 to 12 persons on
motorcycle and 15 to 16 unknown persons started to abuse him
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8867 of 2026(4) dt.21-05-2026
2/4
and when he objected, it is alleged that Nitesh Giri (Petitioner
No.1) directed others to kill him upon which one Vikash Kumar
(Petitioner No.2) shot with a Katta in his hand, however, the
informant managed to escape. It has further been alleged that
petitioner no.3, namely, Chandan Giri tried to outrage the
modesty of one Sunita Devi and the petitioner no.4 forcibly
snatched a gold chain worth Rs.75,000/- from the informant's
neck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners have falsely been implicated on account of personal
differences and in fact the petitioners and the informants are in
inimical terms. It has further been submitted that for the same
incidence a counter-case was lodged on behalf of the father of
the petitioner no.2, being Mahua P.S. Case No.747 of 2025. It
has next been submitted that in fact the informant who was the
aggressor and stated a false and concocted case under section
109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 has been lodged, as it
would be evident that there has not been any injury caused to
any of the persons despite such allegations. It has lastly been
submitted that petitioner nos.1 and 3 have one criminal case and
petitioner nos.2 and 4 have two criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8867 of 2026(4) dt.21-05-2026
3/4
the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(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
Mahua P.S. Case No.742 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners
shall be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain
physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two
consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of
the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be
liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved
in similar nature of offence in future, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to move for
cancellation of their bail bond.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8867 of 2026(4) dt.21-05-2026
4/4
(v) The learned Court below shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in
case at any stage it is found that the petitioners
have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court
below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond
of the petitioners. 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/ayushkr-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.