Patna High Court
Gautam Kumar @ Gautam SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Gautam Kumar, was named in FIR No. 96 of 2025 for alleged assault on an informant and his nephew, with charges under several sections of the B.N.S. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the FIR was filed two days after the alleged incident without explanation, that there were no specific allegations against him, and that the injuries were minor. The State opposed the bail, noting the petitioner’s involvement in four other cases but acknowledged he was already on bail in those matters. The Court examined the lack of specific charges, the delay in filing the FIR, and the nature of the injuries, and concluded that these factors did not warrant denial of bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence. The order directed that the bail bond be executed promptly without awaiting verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the FIR lacks specific allegations against the petitioner
- Whether the two‑day delay in filing the FIR is a ground to deny bail
- Whether the nature of injuries (simple, caused by blunt objects) affects the bail decision
- Whether the petitioner’s pending cases and existing bail status influence the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR delay
- specific allegation
- assault
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
- BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89624 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGALPUR KOTWALI District-
Bhagalpur
======================================================
Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Singh S/o Bhim Singh R/o Mohalla- Sikandarpur
Pani Tanki Navwa Toli, P.S- Mojahidpur, Dist- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.M. Ashraf, Sr. Advocates
Mr. Shehan Ashraf, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard Mr. S.M. Ashraf, learned Senior counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, learned APP for
the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
18.08.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 324(2),
352, 351(2), 329(3) of the B.N.S.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along
with other co-accused persons have assaulted the informant and
his nephew with lathi-danda, rod, knife, fat and fists due to
which they sustained injuries.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89624 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/4
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 16.08.2025 but the present F.I.R. was instituted on
18.08.2025 after delay of two days without giving any
explanation of delay and apart from that there is case and
counter case between the parties. Although the petitioner is
named in the F.I.R. but there is no specific allegation of any
assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner rather there
is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner in the
F.I.R. Although some persons have received injuries but the
injury report upon the injured persons suggests that the injuries
are simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the
petitioner carries four more cases 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 there is no
specific allegation in the F.I.R. against the petitioner and the
injury inflicted upon the injured persons are simple in nature
and there is case and counter case between the parties as well as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89624 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/4
F.I.R. was instituted after delay of two days, 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, Bhagalpur in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case
No. 96 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89624 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
4/4
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…