Abhinay Kumar Thakur @ Chunnu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45744 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2023 Thana- BASOPATTI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Abhinay Kumar Thakur @ Chunnu S/o Late Kusheshwar Thakur R/o Village - Jasso, ward no -1, P.S.- Basopati, Distt.- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Shivam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Harendra Prasad, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mayank Raj, Advocate Mr. Adarsh Pronar, Advocate Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 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 Basopatti P.S. Case No. 94 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307, 324, 325, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC.
3. The allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that on eventful date, all FIR named accused persons including petitioner assaulted the informant, causing several injuries.
4. Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that, so far as the present petitioner is concerned, his name surfaced only in the last three
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45744 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 2/3 to four lines of the first page of the fardbeyan. It is submitted that the specific allegations of assault had already been attributed to other accused persons, and the role attributed to the present petitioner is that he, along with Sanjeev Mandal, assaulted the informant and his son with a rod. It is further submitted that, upon completion of the investigation, a final form has been submitted in favour of the petitioner. However, the learned trial court disagreed with the said conclusion and took cognizance, which necessitated the filing of the present application for anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that the petitioner is involved in one other criminal case, in which he has already been granted bail.
5. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submitted that there are specific allegations of assault against the petitioner and that the informant sustained injuries on his head. In view of the aforesaid, it is submitted that this is not a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the fact that the specific allegation of assault on the head of the informant has been attributed to the other coaccused.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45744 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 3/3
6. Having considered the submissions of the parties and in particular the fact that after completion of investigation, a final form has been submitted in favour of petitioner, though a general allegation of assault upon the informant has been attributed to the petitioner, the specific allegation of assault on the head of the informant has been attributed against Jitendra Thakur, accordingly, the petitioner named above be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each of the satisfaction of learned CJM, Madhubani/concerned court, in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No. 94 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that:- One of the bailors shall be family member of the petitioner.
(Ranjan Kumar Jha, J) veena/- U T