Patna High Court Dismisses Anticipatory Bail Plea Filed Directly Under BNSS 2023 Without Approaching Sessions Court First
Patna, July 18, 2025 – The Patna High Court, in a detailed and landmark judgment delivered by Hon’ble Justice Soni Shrivastavahas dismissed a criminal miscellaneous application filed directly under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023which corresponds to Section 438 of the CrPCciting lack of special or extraordinary circumstances for bypassing the Sessions Court.
Background of the Case
Seven petitioners, including Nirmala devi, Kunal Kumarand others, had sought anticipatory bail in connection with Samastipur Town P.S. Case No. 215 of 2024 under serious charges including Sections 126(2), 115(2), 338, 339, 340(2), 344, 61(2), 308(5) and 3(5) of the BNSS. The case revolves around alleged fraudulent transfer of property through a forged sale deed.
The petitioners directly approached the High Court, invoking its concurrent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the BNSS 2023, without first moving the Sessions Court.
Key Observations by the Court
- Justice Soni Shrivastava acknowledged the concurrent jurisdiction of the Sessions Court and the High Court under Section 438 CrPC / Section 482 BNSS, affirming that there is in the Legal Bar to approaching the High Court directly for anticipatory bail.
- However, the Court emphasized the importance of judicial propriety and consistent practicestating that special or extraordinary reasons must exist to justify bypassing the Sessions Court.
- The Court held that mere choice of forum due to concurrent jurisdiction is not sufficient justification unless compelling circumstances are demonstrated.
- Citing several judgments including Barun Chandra Thakur v. CBI, Pankaj Bansal v. State (Delhi)and Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P.the Court clarified that extraordinary media attentionthreat to life, or systemic bias may sometimes justify a direct High Court approach—but none of these conditions were met in the present case.
Final Verdict
The Patna High Court concluded that while the application is maintainableit is not entertainable in absence of any compelling or special circumstances. Hence, the Court:
- Dismissed the anticipatory bail application without going into the merits of the case.
- Granted liberty to the petitioners to first approach the Sessions Court.
- Allowed them to approach the High Court again, if necessary, after exhausting the lower remedy.
Significance of the Ruling
This judgment sets a critical procedural precedent under the newly enforced BNSSS 2023stressing the discipline of hierarchy in seeking anticipatory bail. It reiterates that:
“While liberty is paramount under Article 21 of the Constitution, procedural prudence demands that Sessions Court should ordinarily be the first forum for relief under Section 482 BNSS.”
Legal Representation
For Informant: Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey and Mrs. Aditi Shahi
For Petitioners: SR. Advocate Mr. NK Agrawal and Mr. Abhijeet abhigyan
For State: APP Mr. Madan Kumar