Dinesh Roy v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25035 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2024 Thana- KORHA District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.
Dinesh Roy Son of Late Nand Lal Ray Resident of Village- Bhatwara, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar 2.
Ravi Kumar Roy @ Rahul Kumar Roy @ Rabi Kumar Son of Dinesh Roy Resident of Village- Bhatwara, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar 3.
Amit Kumar Roy @ Amit Roy Son of Dinesh Roy Resident of VillageBhatwara, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Korha P.S. Case No.25 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that initially the case was filed under bailable Sections in which he had been granted bail, whereafter at the time of submission of charge-sheet, non bailable Sections have also been added.
4. In view of ratio laid down in the case of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25035 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026 2/2 Mahendra Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2004(3)PLJR 491, since the petitioners have submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court, the present application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
5. In such view of the matter, the present application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to surrender before the learned Trial Court within four weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Trial Court would consider the same without being prejudiced by this order in view of the ratio laid down in the case of Mahendra Prasad Singh (supra).
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application stands disposed of.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) anand/- U T