Patna High Court
PAPPU GIRI @ PAPPU KUMAR GIRIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, directing his release on bail with stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Giri, was named in an FIR for murder (IPC s.302 read with s.34) and an offence under the Arms Act (s.27) arising from a land‑dispute incident in which a co‑accused, Chandan Ram, fired the fatal shot. The petitioner contended that the FIR only specifically implicated the co‑accused for the shooting and that the allegations against him were vague and omnibus. He sought anticipatory bail, citing the earlier grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused Prince Kumar and arguing that his criminal antecedents, wherein he is already on bail in six other cases, should not preclude bail. The State opposed the bail. The Court held that, given the lack of specific allegation of a fatal shot against the petitioner and considering the principle of judicial parity, the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and conditions under CrPC s.438(2) and BNSS s.482(2).
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail to a petitioner when the FIR contains only general allegations against him?
- Does the petitioner’s criminal antecedent preclude the grant of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- criminal antecedent
- general allegation
- Section 302 IPC
- Arms Act
- CrPC 438
- BNSS 482
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9180 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1079 Year-2023 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Pappu Giri @ Pappu Kumar Giri, Son of Udaynarayan Giri @ Uday Giri, R/o
village-Raghunathpur, P.S.-Raghunathpur (O.P.), Distt.-East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Turkauliya
Raghunathpur (O.P.) P.S. Case No.1079 of 2023 registered
under Sections 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per FIR, the petitioner along with other co-
accused persons assaulted the husband of the informant,
where during the occurrence, fatal firing was made by co-
accused Chandan Ram. The injured husband of the informant
died during the treatment in hospital, where occurrence is
alleged to be arising out of land dispute.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9180 of 2024(4) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner
submitted that specific allegation of firing, which caused death
of the husband of informant is available against co-accused
Chandan Ram and just as to harass entire family, the
petitioner along with nine other co-accused persons implicated
with present case with very much general and omnibus
allegation. It is submitted that no overt act appears to be
attributed against the petitioner as per FIR, where the
informant claimed to be an eye witness of the occurrence and
considering the aforesaid factual aspect, the co-accused
Prince Kumar was granted anticipatory bail by one of the
learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court through Cr. Misc.
No.46872 of 2024 dated 07.08.2024 and, therefore, as a
matter of judicial parity, this petitioner also deserves
anticipatory bail.
5. Explaining criminal antecedent, it is submitted
that petitioner implicated with six more criminal cases, where
brother and brother-in-law of informant are one of the parties
and in all six cases, petitioner is on bail. It is submitted that if
merit of the case otherwise appears convincing, merely on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9180 of 2024(4) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
ground of criminal antecedent, the bail of petitioner should
not be ordinarily declined and in support of this submission,
learned counsel has relied upon legal report of Hon’ble
Supreme Court as available through Prabhakar Tewari vs.
State of U.P. & Ors. [(2020) 11 SCC 648].
6. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as allegation qua physical assault appears
very much general and omnibus against petitioner, where
specific allegation to cause fatal gun shot injury is available
against co-accused Chandan Ram, accordingly, the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the
court below within a period of four weeks from today, is
directed to 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 the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection
with Turkauliya Raghunathpur (O.P.) P.S. Case No.1079 of
2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9180 of 2024(4) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
‘CrPC’)/under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…