Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14043/2026bail rejected

Ritik Rai @ Ritik Raj @ Ritik Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-12Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14043 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2025 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Ritik Rai @ Ritik Raj @ Ritik Kumar Son of Umesh Ray Resident of VillageBijauli (Bijili), 37, Ps- Panapur, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Sandesh Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Panapur P.S. Case no.311 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 324(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the thirteen named accused persons including the petitioner herein as also ten unknown accused persons are said to have come variously armed with lathi, danda etc. They started to abuse the informant and others. While allegations of overt act is against a number of accused, the petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant's brother Ritesh Prasad with a knife causing serious injuries.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14043 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is case and counter case between the parties with injuries having been sustained on both the sides. The petitioner is in custody since 11.11.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner of having assaulted the brother of the informant with a knife together with a corresponding injury having been found which has been opined to be grievous in nature, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T