Jitendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25100 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2024 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Jitendra Rai Son of Late Rambabu Rai R/o Vill- Daudpur, P.S.- Shahur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons intercepted him and Vikash fired thereafter Anil and Vinod wrapped towel around his neck while Vikash assaulted Ranjan on his head by butt of pistol causing injury, thereafter Vidhanchal, Veer Bahadur and petitioner assaulted Ranjan indiscriminately by an iron rod causing fracture of head and Bittu assaulted by knife causing injury on lip and snatched his chain.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25100 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that petitioner and the informant are neighbours and are having dispute relating to passage. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that Vikash is alleged to have assaulted Ranjan and thereafter Vidhanchal, Veer Bahadur and petitioner are also alleged to have assaulted Ranjan indiscriminately by an iron rod but then from perusal of the injury report (Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application), it would manifest that the Doctor has opined initially the nature of injury to be simple caused by hard blunt weapon and the opinion was subsequently reserved awaiting NCCT brain report. It is also submitted that subsequently the injury was found to be grievous but then petitioner is not alleged to have assaulted specifically rather four persons are alleged to have assaulted causing injury on the head.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a young boy aged about 27 years, let the petitioner above-named, in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25100 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 3/3 event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Shahpur P.S. Case No. 126 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T