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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3645

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Daulat Ansari, Ashique Ansari @ Asif Ansari, Afroja Khatoon, Sarwari Khatoon, Sogra Khatoon, Gulsan Khatoon @ Gulsan @ Gulsan Bibi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91577 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Ahmad Ali, A.P.P., Mr. Akshay Ashish

The court addresses the standards for anticipatory bail, assessing individual culpability based on specific accusations.

Headnote:The court analyzed the accusations under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and noted the specific charge of assault against the first petitioner, while recognizing that no overt act was attributed to the others. The court allowed anticipatory bail for petitioners 2 to 6, considering their clean antecedents. The court refused bail for petitioner 1 due to the nature of accusations. The case was disposed of accordingly.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 118(2), 109, 74, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita .

3. It is alleged that petitioner no. 1 hit on the back of informant with iron rod due to which he sustained injury, thereafter, all the accused persons abused and assaulted informant and others.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that specific accusation of assault is against petitioner No. 1. So far rest of the petitioners are concerned, there is no specific allegation of any overt act against them. Injuries attributed to petitioner nos. 2 to 6 are simple in nature.

Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that petitioner No. 1 assaulted on the back of informant with iron rod.

6. Considering the specific and direct accusation of assault against petitioner no. 1, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner No. 1 is refused

7. However, considering the nature of accusation against petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 and clean antecedent, the anticipatory bail with regard to petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 is allowed and it is ordered that the above named petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gopalganj in connection with Gopalpur P. S. Case No. 222 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

8. This application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

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