Sanoj Kumar Rai @ Sanoj Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39933 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2026 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Sanoj Kumar Rai @ Sanoj Rai S/o Shivchandra Rai R/O Village - Parmanandpur Lal, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali. 2.
Ravindra Rai S/o Shivchandra Rai R/O Village - Parmanandpur Lal, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ahmad Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117, 109 and 303(2) read with section 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 27.01.2026 at 7:00 PM, he had gone to the house of petitioners, taking return of the loan of an amount of Rs. 80,000/- given to Sanoj for purchasing a pickup vehicle and Rs. 50,000/- given to Ravindra for his daughter marriage, but on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39933 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026 2/3 orders of Shiv Chandra, petitioner no. 2 assaulted the informant by lathi causing injury on head and petitioner no. 1 assaulted by an iron rod causing fracture of upper part of knee.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on account of dispute relating to money, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 2 is alleged to have assaulted the informant by lathi causing injury on head but then the injury has been opined to be simple in nature and the blow is not alleged to have been repeated but then the learned counsel fairly submits that petitioner no. 1 is alleged to have assaulted the informant by a rod causing fracture of upper part of knee and the said injury has been opined to be grievous in nature.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner no. 2 only abovenamed, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39933 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026 3/3 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 Mahua P.S. Case No. 75 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
7. However, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 1. (Satyavrat Verma, J) rajesh/- U T