Arjun Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64383 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2025 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Arjun Rai S/o Rajkeshwar Singh R/o Village - Jeeran Chak, P.S - Didarganj, District- Patna 2.
Upendra Kumar @ Chhotu S/o Jain Yadav @ Jay Narayan Yadav Resident of Nurpur, P.S - Malsalami, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Rina Sinha, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2025
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), 109, 140 and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that he is driver of Late Jitendra Yadav for the last ten years and on 20.04.2025 a quarrel took place in between him and Anshu Kumari, daughter of Late Jitendra Yadav. Further, Arjun Rai (petitioner no. 1) and Upendra Kumar (petitioner no. 2) asked the informant why he teased Anshu Kumari on which he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64383 of 2025(2) dt.25-09-2025 2/3 tendered apology but still Arjun Rai and Upendra Kumar took him to a field and tied his both hands and assaulted him by belt and Upendra Kumar also assaulted by fist.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being the brother-in-law and uncle of Anshu Kumari. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant himself accepts that he had a quarrel with Anshu Kumari for which he was reprimanded. It is next submitted since the informant had misbehaved with Anshu Kumari, hence, he was reprimanded and in order to falsely implicate the petitioners the instant false case came to be instituted in order to coerce the family members of Late Jitendra Yadav into submission.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
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 trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64383 of 2025(2) dt.25-09-2025 3/3 (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 Malsalami P.S. Case No. 199 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T