Ranjit Singh @ Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39147 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2024 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== Ranjit Singh @ Ranjit Kumar Son of Kailash singh R/o Vill- Mai Maner , P.SDhanarua, Distt.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Ranjeet Choubey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 187/2024 dated 14.04.2024 registered for the offence punishable u/s 448, 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 379 and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 13.04.2024 at about 7.30 PM, Ranjit Singh and his both sons were consuming liquor along with unknown persons and during that course when the informant's wife went upon the terrace, they started making vulgar comments upon her. On objection, the co-accused Rahul Kumar armed with a country-made pistol and Ranjit Singh
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39147 of 2025(2) dt.07-07-2025 2/3 armed with iron rod along with unknown persons entered the house of the informant and started assaulting and also set fire on the back of the informant. When the informant's younger son Raushan Kumar came to rescue, Ranjit Singh assaulted him with iron rod causing severe head injury. It is further alleged that during course Rina Devi and Sonali Kumari snatched the necklace of his wife. It is further alleged that the co-accused Rohit Kumar assaulted Sunny Kumar and Vicky Kumar, causing injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Earlier the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 22.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 69255/2024. There is a case and counter case between the parties. The petitioner has one antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the specific allegation of assaulting the informant's son is against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the injury of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39147 of 2025(2) dt.07-07-2025 3/3 informant's son Raushan Kumar is grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Masaurhi, Patna in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 187/2024, with the condition ;- (i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T