Chandrakant Ray @ Bhuvan Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77494 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2025 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
Chandrakant Ray @ Bhuvan Ray S/O Late Rajendra Ray Resident of Village- Daidh, Ward No. 7, P.S- Khanpur, District- Samastipur. 2.
Mukesh Kuamr S/O Chandrakant Ray @ Bhuvan Ray Resident of VillageDaidh, Ward No. 7, P.S- Khanpur, District- Samastipur. 3.
Sachin Kumar S/O Chandrakant Ray @ Bhuvan Ray Resident of VillageDaidh, Ward No. 7, P.S- Khanpur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(2), 74, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, all these accused-petitioners abused and assaulted informant and his family members and also snatched cash.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77494 of 2025(2) dt.11-12-2025 2/3 have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, both parties are Gotiya and petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Allegation of assault is general and omnibus and injuries, allegedly caused by Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, are simple in nature. Rest of the allegations are ornamental in order to make the case grave. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation that they assaulted informant and his family members. Doctor has found the injuries caused by Petitioner No. 3 as grievous in nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and nature of injuries sustained by the injured, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 3 is rejected.
7. So far as Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, nature of injuries sustained by the injured and clean antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77494 of 2025(2) dt.11-12-2025 3/3 grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 is allowed.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bailbond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 198 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T