Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Natural Gas Supplies Prioritized Under Section 3 Essential Commodities Act Amid LNG Disruptions: Central Govt Order
11 Mar 2026
Delhi High Court Directs Ministries, CBFC to Implement Film Accessibility Features for Disabled Persons per RPWD Act Guidelines
11 Mar 2026
Foreign Nationals Entitled to Article 22(1) Grounds of Arrest in Known Language: Karnataka HC Sets at Liberty but Orders Handover to FRRO
11 Mar 2026
Madras HC Permits CBSE Student to Appear for Maths as Additional Subject Despite Policy Violation in Peculiar 'Rat Race' Circumstances
11 Mar 2026
Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Neha Rathore
11 Mar 2026
Menaka Guruswamy Elected India's First Openly Queer Rajya Sabha MP
11 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
PATNA HIGH COURT
SATYAVRAT VERMA, J
Subodh Giri @ Har Har Mahadeo – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER
2 01-12-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No.72/2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 317(5) of the BNS , 2023.
3. Learned APP for the State, at the outset, submits that the law is clear that where offences for which an FIR has been instituted carries punishment of seven years and less, the arrest is not automatic. It is next submitted that in the event if the police intends to arrest an accused who is implicated in a case relating to offences which carries punishment of seven years or less, in that event the police has to resort to certain procedure as incorporated in the BNSS, i.e., the police first has to give a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS. The learned APP next submits that anticipatory bail may or may not be maintainabl
Anticipatory bail applicability depends on the issuance of notice under Section 35 BNSS when the arrest does not automatically follow.
The absence of procedural notice under Section 35 BNSS negates apprehension of arrest for offences with less than seven years punishment.
Anticipatory bail applications lack merit if no notice under Section 35 BNSS is issued, affecting apprehension of arrest.
The court clarified the procedure for arrest under the BNSS, asserting that prior notice is required for offences carrying less than seven years.
Anticipatory bail applications hinge on the issuance of notice under relevant statutes when offenses carry less than seven years of punishment.
Anticipatory bail related to offences with punishments of seven years or less; legal processes must be followed prior to arrest.
Anticipatory bail requires established procedural compliance under relevant statutes concerning arrest for specified offences.
The failure to issue notice under Section 35 BNSS negates the apprehension of arrest in cases with lesser punishments.
Procedures for arrest in cases with penalties under seven years must be followed, impacting anticipatory bail applications.
Failure to issue notice under Section 35 BNSS negates grounds for anticipatory bail in cases with punishments of less than seven years.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article