Ram Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29340 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2020 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - MUZAFFARPUR(WEST) District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ram Kumar Ray S/o Ramakant Rai R/o Village - Gosainpur, Koili Machhua P.S. - Meenapur(Now Rampur Hari), District - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Satahu Sahni S/o Ramnandan Sahni R/o Village - Gosainpur, P.S. - Minapur(now Rampur Hari), Dist. - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 18-05-2026 Heard the parties through virtual mode.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.372 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections 120(B), 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code lodged by the complainant Satahu Sahni.

3. As per the complaint, the petitioner who is a landlord wanted the complainant to work as labourer in his field, upon his refusal was threatened of dire consequences.

4. The case is that the when his son was going to attend his classes, the petitioner asked him to bring a bucket of water. As he brought the same from the nearby tank and wanted to leave, the petitioner ran over his tractor causing severe injuries and ultimately led to detachment of one of the leg. This

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29340 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 2/2 led to the present complaint.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a belated complaint has been filed after two-three months and cognizance has been taken under section 279, 338 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that not only the allegation is of assault causing detachment of one of the leg of the child, despite cognizance taken in the month of August, 2024 after one and half year, the present anticipatory bail application.

7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties as also the materials on record, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.

8. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

9. However, if the petitioner surrenders within a period of four weeks, files bail application, the court concerned shall consider the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T