Pintu Kumar Ray @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1286 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-583 Year-2025 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Pintu Kumar Ray @ Pintu Kumar Son of Singasan Ray R/o Village - Senduari, P.S. - Marhaura, District - Saran at Chapra. 2.

Singasan Ray Son of Late Dhaneshar Ray R/o Village - Senduari, P.S. - Marhaura, District - Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the defects as pointed out by the Office shall be removed during the course of the day.

3. Permission is accorded.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners after some arguments seeks permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no. 1.

5. Permission is accorded.

6. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1286 of 2026(3) dt.17-03-2026 2/3 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of BNS

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners came to purchase straw on which he said that straw has been sold, thereafter the accused persons started abusing and even assaulted him on objection, Kundan assaulted him indiscriminately by knife causing injury on hands, feet and head on orders of Pintu, while Manish and Ranjeet took his chain and accused threatened not to institute a case.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 2 has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being father of Pintu, it is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR it would manifest that informant alleges that Kundan assaulted him by knife causing injury on various part of his body on orders of Pintu but then no specific allegation of assault is alleged against the petitioner no. 2 who is father of Pintu. It is next submitted that since petitioner no. 2 is father of Pintu hence he came to be implicated without any overt act being alleged against him.

9. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1286 of 2026(3) dt.17-03-2026 3/3

10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner no. 2, namely, Singasan Ray, 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 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 Marhaurah P.S. Case No. 583 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T