Patna High Court
Suraj Paswan @ Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the unexplained delay in filing the FIR and the absence of substantive evidence warranted the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC with conditions.
Summary
Suraj Paswan was implicated in a theft and extortion case (Sections 457 and 380 IPC) based on an FIR filed on 28‑02‑2024, three days after the alleged incident. The petitioner argued that the FIR was lodged with an unexplained delay and that the accusation rested merely on suspicion and a prior case against him, with no substantive evidence or eyewitnesses. The State opposed anticipatory bail, noting a pending case but acknowledging the petitioner was already on bail in that matter. The High Court observed the delay and lack of material evidence, deeming the accusation insufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023, subject to strict conditions including cooperation with the trial, presence in court, and no tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the FIR is filed after an unexplained delay and is based primarily on suspicion.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and pending cases affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 380, 457
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- delay in FIR
- suspicion
- theft
- extortion
- Criminal Procedure
- bail conditions
- Indian Penal Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89590 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2024 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Suraj Paswan @ Suraj Kumar Son of Bijendra Paswan village -Garam Rani
Pokhar, Police Station- Lalganj, District -Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 41 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
28.02.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing
theft at the house of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. that
the date of occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. is 25.02.2024 and
the present F.I.R. was instituted on 28.02.2024 after delay of three
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89590 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
days without giving any explanation of delay. It appears from the
F.I.R. that merely on the basis of suspicion, the informant has
incorporated the name of the petitioner merely on the ground that
earlier the petitioner has been made accused in Lalganj P.S. Case
No. 204 of 2022 and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material
has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the
petitioner in the present occurrence and even no one of the eye
witness of the alleged occurrence.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the
petitioner carries one more case 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 that the F.I.R. was
instituted after delay of three days and the petitioner has been
made accused merely on the basis of suspicion, 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur/Court concerned in connection with
Lalganj P.S. Case No. 41 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89590 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/
Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions
:-
(1) 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
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) 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)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…