Ranjeet Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68893 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ranjeet Thakur s/o Ganesh Thakur R/o Vill.- Bhrahotra, P.S - Pandaul, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Alias Ashok Karn For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 162/2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 1798/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 103 of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, there is allegation against co-accused Gautam Thakur who is said to have fired at chest of the informant's husband and in the way to hospital the informant's died. It is alleged that the petitioner and others were present at the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. There is no specific allegation of firing against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68893 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 2/3 petitioner rather allegation of firing against co-accused Gautam Thakur and allegation against the petitioner is quite vague. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. He further submits no recovery of any incriminating article, weapon, or material has been made from the conscious possession or the house of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence, rather, at that relevant time, he was at his home. Allegations against the petitioner are general and omnibus in nature.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no specific overt act against the petitioner, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68893 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 3/3 ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 162/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkumar/- U T