Vinay Kumar Rai @ Goni Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53346 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2023 Thana- BUXAR MUFFSIL District- Buxar ====================================================== Vinay Kumar Rai @ Goni Rai Son of Kameshwar Ray @ Kameshwar rai Resident of village- sikraul, P.S- Rajpur, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manish Rai Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 427, 435, 436, 153 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Prosecution story, in short, is that, mob of around 250 persons came at the gate of Bihar Thermal Power Plant and raised slogans against local administration and restrained labourers and workers to enter the factory.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53346 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence and he was not present at the alleged date and time of occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has fifteen criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that petitioner bears a large number of criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also fact that petitioner has fifteen criminal antecedents, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail, hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53346 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 3/3 learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T