Ramesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77845 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2025 Thana- PATRAKARNAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Ramesh Kumar S/O Late Brijnandan Prasad R/O Mohalla- Mahavir Nagar, Hanuman Nagar, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Patrakarnagar, District- Patna 2.
Rishabh Anand @ Shani Kumar @ Rishav Anand S/O Mr. Ramesh Kumar R/O Mohalla- Mahavir Nagar, Hanuman Nagar, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Patrakarnagar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate For the State :
Ms. Rina Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :
Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Kumari Chanda, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the Informant.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Patrakarnagar P.S. Case No. 203 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 352, 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the petitioners and others had brutally assaulted the informant with bricks, causing grievous injury.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit
2/5 that from the perusal of the F.I.R., it would be evident that the allegations of assault by the petitioners with bricks, despite the fact that they are stated to have been armed with lathi, danda and brick. It has further been submitted that the injuries caused to the injured Pawan Kumar does not corroborate the allegations levelled in the F.I.R.
and in fact, from perusal of the injury report, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-P/4, it would be evident that there were three injuries found which are abrasion on left forehead, abrasion on occipital region of scalp and abrasion of left index finger and after the x-ray was done of the head and the left foot and from perusal of the same, it would be evident that there was no fracture found in the findings after the x-ray of the head while the finding arrived at the x-ray of left foot and hand fracture was seen and the same was referred to as grievous. It has further been submitted that even if that injury is caused the same is on the non-vital part of the body which cannot be said to be fatal. It has next been submitted that petitioner no.
1 himself is an old man and he has falsely been implicated where there was case and counter case and the F.I.R. was lodged by the petitioner no.
3/5
1. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners carry clean antecedent
5. Learned APP for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It has been submitted that the petitioners have brutally assaulted the informant causing grievous injury for which medical examination was done. It has been submitted that the petitioners as well as informant side are in dispute with regard to certain passage and on account of such the present incident had occurred and the petitioners should not be granted the liberty of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Patrakarnagar P.S. Case No. 203 of 2025 subject to the
4/5 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
5/5 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U