Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjeet Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39107 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2022 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjeet Kumar Chaudhary S/O Visheshwar Chaudhary R/O Village- Hindupur, Ward No. 08, P.S.- Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Distt.- Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No.409 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 448, 341, 323, 324, 354, 307, 379 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the fateful day, while the informant and his mother were feeding the cattle, all the FIR-named accused persons, variously armed, trespassed into their house and assaulted the informant and his family members. A specific allegation has been attributed to the petitioner of inflicting a khanti blow on the head of the informant's father, due to which he sustained serious injury.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39107 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3 Apart from the allegation of assault, the accused persons are also alleged to have snatched valuables and misbehaved with the female members of the family.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the entire prosecution case, insofar as it relates to the petitioner, falls to the ground for the simple reason that during the course of investigation, the police found no material against him and, accordingly, did not send up for trial. In support of the aforesaid contention, a copy of the final report has also been brought on record. It is further submitted that, notwithstanding the aforesaid conclusion arrived at by the Investigating Officer, the learned jurisdictional court, differing with the final report, has taken cognizance of the offences against the petitioner as well. Hence, the necessity of the present application. So far as the injury allegedly sustained by the informant's father and attributed to the petitioner is concerned, the same has been found to be simple in nature. The petitioner is a man of fair antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully cooperate in the proceedings of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that once the learned jurisdictional court has taken cognizance of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39107 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3 offences as alleged in the FIR, the complicity of the petitioner is writ large.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the police, after investigation, submitted final form showing the petitioner as innocent, however, differing with the final report, the learned jurisdictional court has taken cognizance of the offences as alleged in the FIR, besides the simple nature of injury and the fair antecedent of the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No.409 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T