Patna High Court
Balram PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
Petitioners 1‑3 were granted pre‑arrest bail, while petitioner 4 was denied bail.
Summary
The petitioners, four members of the Paswan family, sought pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging that they, while intoxicated, entered an informant's house, attempted to outrage her modesty and assaulted family members with intent to kill. The petitioners claimed they were falsely implicated and that a case‑and‑counter‑case existed between the agnate parties, with a general allegation against three of them and a specific allegation of assault with an iron rod against the fourth. The State opposed the bail. The court held that, on a prima facie basis, the first three petitioners were entitled to pre‑arrest bail subject to a bond and verification of antecedents, but denied bail to the fourth petitioner due to the specific assault allegation. The order also directed the district court to verify any pending cases and suggested mediation as per the Supreme Court's guidance in Naushey Ali v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The bail application was disposed of, granting bail to petitioners 1‑3 and refusing it to petitioner 4.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to accused charged with offences under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 74, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether the specific allegation of assault with an iron rod causing head injury justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case between agnate parties influences the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- outrage of modesty
- case and counter case
- mediation
- Bihar
- Arms Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92071 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
======================================================
1. Balram Paswan S/O Devendra Paswan Resident of Village-Chanda,P.S-
Athmalgola,Distt-Patna
2. Devendra Paswan S/O - Late Babu lal Paswan Resident of Village-
Chanda,P.S-Athmalgola,Distt-Patna
3. Pappu Paswan S/O- Devendra Paswan Resident of Village-Chanda,P.S-
Athmalgola,Distt-Patna
4. Shankar Paswan S/O- Devendra Paswan Resident of Village-Chanda,P.S-
Athmalgola,Distt-Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Ram Sumiran
Rai, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Athmalgola P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 74,
303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioners
along with other accused persons, in drunk state, had entered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92071 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
into the house of the informant and they had tried to outrage the
modesty of the informant, and when the family members of the
informant came to save her, they had assaulted them also with
an intention to kill.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. There is case and
counter case between the parties. Both the parties are agnates.
General and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the
petitioners no. 1 to 3. Specific allegation against the petitioner
no. 4 is that he had assaulted the son of the informant by means
of iron rod causing head injury, however, the same has been
opined by the doctor to be simple in nature. 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 there is case and counter
case between the parties. Both the parties are agnates. General
and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners
no. 1 to 3. I am of the opinion that petitioners no. 1 to 3 have,
prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92071 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
7. The petitioners no. 1 to 3, 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/- (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 Athmalgola P.S.
Case No. 96 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. So far as petitioner no. 4 is concerned, considering
the specific allegation against him that he had assaulted the son
of the informant by means of iron rod causing head injury, I am
not inclined to enlarge him on pre-arrest bail.
9. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners no. 1 to 3 as stated
in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners no. 1 to 3 as what has been
stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force
automatically.
10. It is, however, open to the respective parties to
settle their dispute outside the Court amicably in light of the law
laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Naushey Ali & Ors.
Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92071 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
11. If the parties desire to resolve the dispute outside
the Court amicably by way of mediation, learned District Court
is directed to take necessary steps to issue notices to the
respective parties and upon their appearance, refer the matter
before the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center by
fixing a date for appearance of the parties to give effect to
Mediation 2.0.
12. Accordingly, the present bail application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…