Munil Rai @ Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44013 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2025 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Munil Rai @ Amit Kumar S/O Dindayal Rai RESIDENT OF MOHALLAGATE NO 21, INFRONT OF DURGA APARTMENT DUJARA, RAJAPUL, P.S.- BUDHACOLONY, DIST.- PATNA 2.

Sunil Ray S/O Dindayal Rai RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- GATE NO 21, INFRONT OF DURGA APARTMENT DUJARA, RAJAPUL, P.S.- BUDHACOLONY, DIST.- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 109, 3(5) and 117(2) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that Sunil Ray (petitioner no. 2) assaulted by rod causing injury on head and thereafter Munil Rai (petitioner no. 1) assaulted by butt of pistol causing injury on jaw and teeth.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from perusal of the injury report annexed as Annexure-2, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44013 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 2/3 would manifest that the Doctor initially opined the injury to be simple but after cutting the word simple, the injury was opined to be grievous. It is further submitted that after cutting the words simple, the same has not been initialed even by the Doctor which casts as aspersion on the injury report. It is next submitted that petitioners are not criminals and they will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the injury initially which was found simple has been cut but then has not been initialed by the Doctor.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Budha

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44013 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 3/3 Colony P.S. Case No. 149 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the BNSS.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T