Patna High Court
CR. MISC./48750/2026 of Vishambhar Sahu Vs The State of Bihar on 13 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48750 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2016 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga ====================================================== 1. Vishambhar Sahu, S/o Late Kari Sahu Resident of Village - Bajitpur, Afjala, P.S - Biraul,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48750 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2016 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga ======================================================
1.
Vishambhar Sahu, S/o Late Kari Sahu Resident of Village - Bajitpur, Afjala, P.S - Biraul, District - Darbhanga
2.
Rudal Sahu @ Sanjeet Kumar Sahu, S/o Vishambhar Sahu Resident of Village - Bajitpur, Afjala, P.S - Biraul, District - Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
13-08-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 448, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case is of the Year 2016 and the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 02.04.2016, six named accused persons including the petitioners came and started abusing and Prakash Sahu assaulted his son (Dinesh) by khanti casing injury on his thigh and also assaulted his wife by
Axe causing injury on head and Visheshwar assaulted Ram Babu by lathi and danda causing injury on finger and Rubi snatched chain of his wife while Kanchan Devi took out Rs.1200/- from his pocket.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case on account of dispute relating to land. It is further submitted that a specific averment has been made at Para-13 that notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C. was served on the petitioners and they cooperated in the investigation and police never felt the need of arresting them. Further, charge-sheet came to be submitted on 30.09.2016 based on which cognizance was taken on 06.03.2017. It is further submitted that a specific pleading has been made that from 22.06.2017 to 11.03.2024, there is not a single order for issuance of summon. Further, on 15.03.2024 summons were issued, but the same was never served and thereafter non-bailable warrant of arrest came to be issued, as such, police started knocking door of the petitioners. It is further submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that when summons were not served on the petitioners then on what basis the non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued. It is also submitted that since police during the course of investigation never felt the need of arresting the petitioners and petitioners cooperated in the investigation, thereafter charge-sheet came to be submitted based on which summons were issued but never served whether in such a condition, it would be prudent for the Court to send the petitioners to jail. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Biraul P. S. Case No.95 of 2016, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioners after their release are trying the delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge are trying to delay the trial in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T