Patna High Court
Jay Ram Panjiyara @ Jayram PangiyaraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case for pre‑arrest bail and ordered their release on bail subject to bond and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Jay Ram Panjiyara and Deepak Panjiyara applied for pre‑arrest bail in a 2016 case alleging they surrounded an informant’s house and fired indiscriminately, charged with offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307, 504 and Arms Act section 27. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, that the allegations were omnibus, that the dispute was a land‑related agnate fight with no firearm injuries, and that they have a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, found that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case for bail and ordered their release on pre‑arrest bail, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and verification of any pending criminal antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in a case involving serious offences under the IPC and Arms Act.
- Whether the general and omnibus nature of the allegations justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and lack of firearm injury affect the bail decision.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code can be invoked to condition the bail order.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 504
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- Section 482 CrPC
- land dispute
- false implication
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91855 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2016 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
1. Jay Ram Panjiyara @ Jayram Pangiyara, aged about- 59 years, Male, Son of
Bindeshwari Panjiyara
2. Deepak Panjiyara, aged about-55 years, Male, S/o Late Matru Panjiyara,
Both Resident of Vill.- Nagardih P.S- Fulldumar,Dist- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Raj
Kishor Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Amarpur (Fullidumar) P.S. Case No. 83 of 2016, registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341,
307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms
Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioners
along with other accused persons had surrounded the house of
the informant and had started firing indiscriminately, with an
intention to kill.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91855 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. General and
omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners.
Both the parties are agnate and they were involved in free fight
with respect to a piece of land, however, no one had sustained
fire-arm injury. Petitioners have clean antecedent. On these
grounds, petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the fact that general and omnibus
allegation has been levelled against the petitioners. Both the
parties are agnate and they were involved in free fight with
respect to a piece of land, however, no one had sustained fire-
arm injury. Petitioners have clean antecedent. I am of the
opinion that petitioners have, prima facie, made out a case to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91855 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court
where the case is pending, in connection with Amarpur
(Fullidumar) P.S. Case No. 83 of 2016, subject to the condition
as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…