Amarjit Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18311 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1103 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Amarjit Ray S/O Dhanraj Ray Resident of village- Kalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra.
2.
Daroga Ray S/O Dhanraj Ray Resident of village- Kalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra.
3.
Biresh Ray S/O Dhanraj Ray Resident of village- Kalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra.
4.
Bala Kumar @ Balajit Kumar Son of Amarjit Ray Resident of villageKalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra. 5.
Bhushan Kumar Ray S/O Daroga Ray Resident of village- Kalyanpur, P.S.- Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra. 6.
Golu Kumar Ray @ Golu Kura S/O Daroga Ray. Resident of villageKalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra. 7.
Kalu Kumar @ Dhiraj Kumar @ Dhajaj Kumar S/O Hawaldar Ray Resident of village- Kalyanpur, P.S.-Sonpur / Sonepur, District.- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammed Arif ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
2/4 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners came variously armed on 14.11.2025 at 7 P.M. and assaulted him causing injury on head and body, further his brother also suffered injury on head, while his family members were also assaulted as detailed in the FIR, next alleges that accused assaulted them as they did not vote for a particular political party of their choice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on account of dispute relating to voting to a particular political party, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is further submitted that allegation of assault is not specific rather is general and omnibus in nature and petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are not criminals. It is next submitted that no doubt allegation is of assaulting the informant and his brother but then the injury suffered by them is simple in nature. It is reiterated and submitted that allegation of assault is not specific. It is further submitted that petitioners are not absconders rather were availing their remedy available in law and had approached
3/4 this court in the month of March, 2026 but then the case was not taken up and police in a mechanical manner applied for seeking process under section 82 Cr.P.C. which was granted by the court by an order dated 18.04.2026. It is thus submitted that if petitioners had moved this court seeking anticipatory bail can it be said that they were absconding or trying to evade the law. 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. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that allegation of assault is not specific, petitioners are not criminals and are persons with clean antecedent.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
4/4 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No.1103/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioners despite giving assurance to this Court are not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T