Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in a BNS case. The informant pointed out that process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. had been issued against the petitioner. Holding the application not maintainable on that basis, the Court dismissed it.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13106 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2024 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajiv Nayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
with Biraul P.S. Case No. 403 of 2024 instituted under Sections 103(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
submits that process under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner and therefore, this application is not maintainable.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13106 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/2
be not maintainable, accordingly, the application stands
dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail application is maintainable when process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Shubh Kant Mahto
Ramakant Mahto
Sita Ram Mahto
Bhagwant Mahto
Sumitra Devi
The State of Bihar
Sandeep Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
