SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 260

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. PARDIWALA, K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Rama Kant Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.829 of 2026 (@Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.837 of 2026)
Decided On : 11-02-2026

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Karunakar Mahalik, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR Mr. Divyansh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Kumar Saurav, Adv. Mr. Ashish Giri, Sr. Adv. Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, AOR Mr. Zafar Inayat, Adv. Mr. Nikhil, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
Accused praying for anticipatory bail has to make out more than a prima facie case of false implication – Grant of anticipatory bail is not a matter of course.

Headnote:

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 482 – Anticipatory bail – Grant of – Case registered for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Anticipatory bail may be granted by Court even in a case of murder provided Court is convinced that accused persons praying for anticipatory bail have been falsely implicated due to some personal vendetta, political rivalry etc. – Accused praying for anticipatory bail has to make out more than a prima facie case of false implication – Grant of anticipatory bail is not a matter of course – Prima facie, ocular version as narrated is in tune with medical evidence on record – Just because title suit is pending between parties by itself could not have been a ground to believe that accused persons have been falsely implicated – Respondents have criminal antecedents – Impugned Order passed by High Court set aside – Appeal allowed. (Paras 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal arises from the Order passed by High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 30-7-2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.30622/2025 by which anticipatory bail application preferred by Respondent Nos.2 and 3 – herein respectively came to be allowed in connection with case registered for offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita respectively.

Findings of Court:

Principles governing grant of anticipatory bail differ to a considerable extent from principles governing grant of regular bail. This shall be kept in mind by concerned Court while considering the regular bail application of the accused persons.

Result : Appeal allowed.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the Order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 30-7-2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.30622/2025 by which the anticipatory bail application preferred by the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 – herein respectively came to be allowed in connection with Bishanpur Police Station Case No.14 of 2025 registered on 27-1-2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (for short the, “BNS, 2023”) respectively.

3. Later in point of time as the injured succumbed to the injuries, Section 103(1) of the BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the “IPC”) came to be added.

4. The appellant before us is the son of the deceased. He also happens to be the original informant. The First Information Report lodged by the appellant – herein with the concerned Police Station on 27-1-2025 reads thus:-

    “To

    The Hon’ble Officer-in-Charge

    P.S. Bishanpur, Darbhanga

    Sir,

    With due respect this is to inform that, I Ramakant Singh alias Sonu S/o Shri Shubh Narayan Singh am the resident of the village - Gorhiyari, P.S. Bishanpur, District Darbhanga. On 23.01.2025 at about 9.00 AM when I was going to recharge my mobile, then on the way (1) Rajneesh Kumar Singh alias Aman Kumar Singh aged 24 years S/o Ratneshwar Singh surrounded me infront of his house near the bridge and while using abusive and unparliamentary languages at me tried to kill me while throwing from the bridge and snatched my mobile and assaulted me by punch. Somehow I managed to escape and narrated the entire incident to my father and other family members on which my father and cousin brother Jai Shankar Prasad Singh and others went to the house of Ram Singhasan Singh for coercing. While hearing this Ram Singhasan Singh became very angry and ordered to kill them, upon which Rajneesh Kumar Singh @ Aman Kumar Singh assaulted on the head of my father with the butt of pistol and Ratneshwar Singh with the iron rod and Ram Singhasan Singh also assaulted on the head of my father. My father fell down on the ground. When Jaishankar Prasad Singh tried to save him, then Seema Devi and Aarti Devi started throwing the bricks and stones. Even in the his fallen conditions, the all the accused persons assaulted on the head of my father with the rods and hammer and a lot of blood started oozing out from the mouth and nose of my father. During this period, while seeing the peoples coming they fled away. In his senseless condition. I brought my father alongwith my family members to DMCH, Darbhanga at 10.00 pm for treatment but seeing his critical condition they referred him to Patna for better treatment. When I reached Muzaffarpur, then his condition had worsened, hence he was taken to Prasad Clinic Muzaffarpur but the Doctors there also seeing his critical condition suggested to take him to Patna. On 24.01.2025 at 4'O clock day he was admitted in ‘Samay Hosptia’ Patna, where his brain surgery has been conducted. He is struggling with life and death on ventilator in ICU. Administration has been informed about the incident. My snatched mobile is Realme-C35, Seam No.7488807358. Due to the previous enmity, they tried to kill.

    Therefore, it is humbly requested from the Hon’ble Sir that appropriate legal action be taken against the guilty persons. For this I would be grateful to the Hon’ble Sir.”

5. It appears that in all six persons have been named as accused in the FIR inclusive of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively before us. The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 apprehending arrest prayed for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court declined to grant them anticipatory bail.

6. In such circumstances, they went before the High Court.

7. The High Court accepted their plea and granted them anticipatory bail.

8. The High Court while granting anticipatory bail observed in para 6 as under:-

    “6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top