Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54574 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2023 Thana- Mehendiya District- Arwal ====================================================== 1.
Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Yadav S/o- Krishna Yadav Village- Sarwarpur PsMahendiya Dist- Arwal 2.
Malti Devi w/o- Krishna Yadav Village- Sarwarpur Ps- Mahendiya DistArwal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025
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 341, 323, 308, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, at the outset, submits that the offences for which the instant FIR was instituted carries punishment of seven years and less and accordingly petitioners were given notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C., but then police after investigation, in a mechanical manner, submitted charge sheet. It is next submitted that petitioners cooperated in the investigation and the police,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54574 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/3 during the course of investigation, never felt the need of arresting the petitioners, as such, the police did not file any requisition before the learned Magistrate seeking his permission for arresting the accused persons, it is thus submitted that if police during the course of investigation did not feel the need of arresting the petitioners whether it would be prudent for this Court to send the petitioners to jail. It is also submitted that petitioners will cooperate in the trial to prove their innocence and they will not delay the framing of charge.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahendiya P.S. Case No. 191 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
6. However, it is made clear that if the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54574 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 3/3 Court comes to a conclusion that petitioners, after their release, are trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge are delaying the trial in any manner, in that event, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after recording reasons.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T