Arjun Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24556 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-251 Year-2025 Thana- SANDESH District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Arjun Raj S/O Ramlakhan Singh R/O Dharmpur, P.S- Sandesh, Distt.- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Akanksha Malviya. Advocate Mr. Akasu Keshav, Advocate Ms. Naina Nancy, Advocate Mr. Mukund Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP Mr. Ravi Shankar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rishi Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sandesh P.S. Case No. 251 pf 2025, F.I.R dated 11.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 117(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, that the informant, lodged a written report, alleging that while he was sitting at the entrance of his house, the petitioner, Arjun Raj, and co-accused Chiranjeevi Kumar alias Bhim Singh arrived armed with deadly weapons, abused him, and assaulted him. It is alleged that
2/5 Chiranjeevi Kumar struck the informant on the head with a saawl/khanti, while the petitioner assaulted him with a farsa, causing grievous head injuries. When the informant's wife intervened, she was allegedly assaulted by Jyoti Devi and Mira Kunwar with sticks, and her gold locket weighing about 5 grams was forcibly snatched. It is further alleged that Chiranjeevi Kumar instigated the petitioner to shoot the informant, whereupon the petitioner aimed a firearm at him, forcing him to flee to save his life. The prosecution further alleges that the occurrence stemmed from an earlier dispute dated 06.10.2025 regarding encroachment by way of extension of a sunshade over the informant's land, in respect of which a counter case had already been instituted by the petitioner at Sandesh Police Station. As a result of the assault, the informant sustained serious injuries, including a severe head injury requiring about 31 stitches, besides fractures of his left hand and right leg, and was taken to Sadar Hospital for treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations leveled in first information report, the informant is said to have been assaulted by Chiranjeevi Kumar alias Bhim Singh and also by petitioner namely Arjun Raj. It has next been submitted that the nature of the injuries which is said
3/5 to have been sustained by the informant is not corroborated with the allegation leveled in the first information report as the nature of the injuries which has been recorded by the Medical Officer, have been found to be simple in nature and the other co-accused persons upon whom is said to have similar allegation, namely Chiranjeevi kumar has already been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail in Coordinate Bench. The submissions of counsel for the petitioner is that the injuries being simple in nature and the allegations not being corroborated with the nature of the injury sustained, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner undertakes to maintain peace and harmony with the informant and shall not commit any such offence in future. It is further submitted that, in the event the allegations are found to be true during the course of investigation, the police may be put at liberty to take appropriate steps for cancellation of the bail.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application. Informant has appeared sou-moto and is being represented by Rishi Sinha opposes prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the injuries have been sustained on head.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
4/5 and taking into account that for the similar allegation, the the privilege of anticipatory bail has been granted to the co-accused namely Chiranjeevi Kumar. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Sandesh P.S. Case No.251 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
5/5 (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J) rajan/- U T