Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond and surety conditions, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners—Nitish Kumar, Jivachh Sah, Uro Devi and Vinita Kumari—filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 127(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. The FIR alleged that on 10‑10‑2025 a group of accused, including the petitioners, forcibly entered an informant’s house, assaulted several persons and stole Rs. 3,85,000. The petitioners contended that the allegations against them were vague, that they were falsely implicated, and that the injuries described were minor. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the offences were serious. The Court, after considering the submissions, held that the petitioners could be released on anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, and therefore allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR specifically implicate the petitioners or are vague enough to warrant bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences under Sections 127(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2) and 3(5) precludes anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 127(2), 303(2), 3(5), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- Section 482
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- assault
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9807 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Nitish Kumar S/o Arjun Sahu @ Arjun Sah Resident of ward no 07, vill-
Ujan, PS- Bithan, Distt- Samastipur
2. Jivachh Sah @ Jivachh Sahu @ Jeevas Sah @ Jeevas Sahu S/o Late
Shatrughna Sahu Resident of ward no 07, vill- Ujan, PS- Bithan, Distt-
Samastipur
3. Uro Devi W/o Pramod Sahu Resident of ward no 07, vill- Ujan, PS- Bithan,
Distt- Samastipur
4. Vinita Kumari W/o Pradeep Sahu @ Pradeep Kumar Resident of ward no
07, vill- Ujan, PS- Bithan, Distt- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2),
115(2), 109, 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have antecedent of one case and
petitioner nos. 2 and 4 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are women. It is next submitted that the
informant alleges that on 10.10.2025 at 08:30 PM, nine accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9807 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
persons including the petitioners along with 10-15 unknown
accused came variously armed and forcibly entered the house of
the informant and started abusing, on objection, Anil assaulted
by farsa causing injury on head and also assaulted his wife
causing injury on hand, thereafter Pradeep assaulted his son by
rod causing injury on shoulder, further Jivachh assaulted by
lathi and thereafter Pradeep again assaulted by rod causing
injury on back side of the head, further Anil again assaulted the
informant by back side of the farsa causing fracture of leg and
rest accused also assaulted and took Rs. 3,85,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific
allegation of assaulting the injured is against Anil and Pradeep.
It is further submitted that as far as Jivachh (petitioner no. 2) is
concerned, the allegation against him is of assaulting by lathi. It
is further submitted that as far as petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4 are
concerned, the allegation of assault and abuse is not specific
against them. It is also submitted that Anil and Pradeep are not
petitioners in the instant anticipatory bail application. It is also
submitted that even injury suffered by the injured has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9807 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
opined to be simple in nature, as would manifest from the order
impugned. It is further submitted that Pradeep had moved this
Court seeking regular bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No.
9627 of 2026 and the same came to be allowed by an order
dated 17.02.2026 passed by a learned Co-ordinate Bench.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 Bithan P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…