Rambali Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12721 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-676 Year-2024 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Rambali Rai S/o Late Nagendra Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua, District- Vaishali 2.
Paro Devi W/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua, District- Vaishali 3.
Vipin Kumar S/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua, District- Vaishali 4.
Bharat Kumar S/o Rambali Rai RO Village- Hasanpur Osti, PS- Mahua, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is the second attempt, for grant of anticipatory bail, arising out of Desari Police Station Case No. 676 of 2024, disclosing offences under Sections 80 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The petitioners have renewed their prayer for anticipatory bail which was disposed off by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court with direction to surrender before the court below and make a prayer for regular bail but the petitioners, instead of surrendering, have filed the anticipatory bail for the second time.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the husband of the deceased was granted default
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12721 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 2/3 bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court directed the petitioners to surrender and seek regular bail with the observation that there was no reason why the same benefit should not be given to the petitioners which was given to the husband. Since the husband was given the benefit of default bail, there may not be the same occasion that the petitioners would get default bail after surrender. Petitioners are mother-in-law, father-in-law and brothers-in-law of the deceased. Some of the accused persons who are Nand and Nandosi have been granted anticipatory bail subsequently.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submits that at the first instance, the bail application of the petitioners has been dismissed with direction to surrender and seek regular bail, but the petitioners, instead of seeking regular bail, have approached this Court again for the anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties and the fact that the anticipatory bail of the petitioners was rejected at the first instance with a direction to surrender and seek regular bail and no subsequent development has taken place after rejection of first bail, accordingly, I am not inclined to consider the application for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioners filed for the second time.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12721 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 3/3
7. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T