Disposed

Saurav Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Dec 2025CR. MISC./78913/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest bail sought in an assault case under the BNS and Arms Act. The court granted pre-arrest bail to petitioner nos. 2 to 5, holding allegations against them general and omnibus, subject to conditions including verification of criminal antecedents. Bail was rejected for petitioner no. 1 due to specific allegations against him.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted to petitioner nos. 2 to 5 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties; prayer rejected for petitioner no. 1.

Saurav Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78913 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Saurav Kumar S/o Devendra Singh Resident of Village- Kharaita, P.SChautham, District- Khagaria.

¶5

Sachendra Singh S/o Late Fullo Singh Resident of Village- Kharaita, P.SChautham, District- Khagaria.

¶6

Sakaldip Singh @ Sakaldev Singh S/O Late Tilo Singh @ Lilo Singh Resident of Village- Kharaita, P.S- Chautham, District- Khagaria.

¶7

Subodh Singh S/O Late Tilo Singh @ Lilo Singh Resident of VillageKharaita, P.S- Chautham, District- Khagaria.

¶8

Bhavis Kumar S/O Subodh Singh Resident of Village- Kharaita, P.SChautham, District- Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amar Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP. For the Informant : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate. Ms. Pooja Prasad, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 03-12-2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶16

petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶17

The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 329(4), 74, 324(4), 324(5), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶18

As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78913 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 2/3

¶20

petitioners along with other accused persons armed with lathi, iron rod and three nut assaulted the informant causing injury on his head and also misbehaved with the female members of the family and damaged the motorcycle

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and learned APP for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.

¶23

Considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 to be general and omnibus, the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (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 Chautham P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C / 482(2) BNSS.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78913 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 3/3

¶25

So far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, in view of the specific allegation against him, his prayer for bail is rejected.

¶26

The District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 and if it is found that the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in Para-3 of the bail petition, this order will automatically lose its force.

¶27

The bail application stands disposed of.

¶28

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶29

mantreshwar/-

Saurav Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurav Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyamsundar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sachin Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bipeen Kumar @ Bipeen Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Ankit Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Neelam Kumari Vs The State of Bihar