Ravindra Kumar Pandey @ Ravindra Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46042 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2026 Thana- CHAND District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Ravindra Kumar Pandey @ Ravindra Pandey S/o Late Bharath Pandey R/o Village - Kudhunu , P.S - Chand, District - Kaimur (Bhabua) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chand P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5), 191(2) AND 191(3) of the BNS.

3. The allegation in the FIR is to the extent that petitioner and his son armed with iron rod and gadasa, respectively assaulted informant causing injuries over head.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an admitted land dispute between the parties and that the allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. Although there is an injury on the head, in the absence of any specific allegation, criminal liability under Section 109(1) cannot be fastened upon the petitioner. It is further submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46042 of 2026(2) dt.23-07-2026 2/2 that the son of the petitioner has already been granted bail by this Court. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for extending the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant has drawn the attention of this Court to the allegations in the FIR, specifically that the petitioner came armed with an iron rod and assaulted the victim/informant. It is further submitted that the injury report discloses a corresponding injury caused by a hard and blunt substance, and that the nature of the injury has been opined to be grievous. On these grounds, learned counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail then his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on the same day on its merits without being prejudiced by this order.

(Ranjan Kumar Jha, J) rishabh/- U T