Patna High Court
DINESH SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Singh, was implicated in a FIR alleging offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including assault and murder, after an alleged attack on an elderly informant. The informant died three days later of a cardiac failure, which the petitioner’s counsel argued was not a proximate result of the assault. The police investigation, described as thorough, concluded that the petitioner was innocent and submitted an exonerating report. Despite this, the magistrate took cognizance of the case, prompting the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail to avoid arrest. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court, considering the exonerating police report and the lack of a causal link between the assault and the informant’s death, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the investigating police have exonerated the accused but the magistrate has taken cognizance of the FIR
- Whether the death of the informant, caused by natural cardiac failure, can be considered a proximate result of the alleged assault for bail considerations
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Indian Penal Code
- police exoneration
- magistrate cognizance
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90525 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2021 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
======================================================
DINESH SINGH S/O Late Ram Babu Singh R/o vill - Babhanlai, P.S.- Bihta,
Distt.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379,
504, 307 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on, Section
302 of the Indian Penal Code was also added.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that the accused persons including the petitioner came
and assaulted him by Lathi, Danda and rod causing injury on
head and when his son came to save him, he was also assaulted.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from perusal of the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that the FIR came to be instituted after three days of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90525 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
the occurrence and the informant died during the course of
treatment. It is further submitted that informant was an old man
and he died his natural death on account of cardiac failure and
the assault was not the proximate cause of his death. It is further
submitted that police after threadbare investigation came to a
considered conclusion that petitioner is innocent and thus
submitted final form exonerating him of the allegations but then
the learned Magistrate differing with the police report took
cognizance, as such, the petitioner apprehends his arrest. It is
next submitted that when one investigating agency after
threadbare investigation came to a considered conclusion that
petitioner is innocent, whether it would be prudent for the Court
to send the petitioner to jail based on an order of cognizance
which came to be taken based on the same police report
exonerating the petitioner of the allegations.
5. Learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90525 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is
pending/Successor Court in connection with Bihta P.S. Case
No.61 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.