Brajesh Kumar Roy @ Brajesh Roy @ Brajesh Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2750 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2023 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Saharsa ====================================================== BRAJESH KUMAR ROY @ BRAJESH ROY @ BRAJESH RAY S/O SRI HEMANT KUMAR ROY @ HEMANT KUMAR RAY VILLAGE AND P.O.- EKARD, P.S.- NAUHATTA, DISTRICT- SAHARSA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 220 of 2023, registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 34 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Prosecution story is that sons of the informant were going when the petitioner alongwith co-accused Shyamal Kishore Ray equipped with weapons attacked him from behind. The petitioner struck on his head causing head injury to Alok Kumar and Mukesh Roy was also attacked with sharp weapon causing head injury. Th petitioner was indulged in anti-social activity and the son of the informant, Alok Kumar was the president of Krishna Ashtami fair conducted in Sep., 2023 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2750 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 2/3 they had previous enmity.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner further submits that the incidence is alleged to have occurred on 06.10.2023 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 09.10.2023, the delay has not been explained. The petitioner-accused is alleged to have assaulted in his associate but the injury report says that the nature of injuries sustained are all simple in nature. The petitioner has one criminal history, i.e., Patliputra P.S. Case No. 85 of 2020 for offence alleged to have committed under Sections 354, 323, 504, 419, 500, 509, 120B of IPC and 66(c), 66(e) of I.T. Act in which the petitioner is on bail and even this case was lodged by Ruby Devi, wife of Nandan Kumar Roy, who is said to have own cousin brother of informant, Amarkant Roy and it prima facie appears to be a case of family dispute.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and particularly the fact that the injury report reveals the injury sustained is simple injury and there is family dispute between the parties, this Court is inclined to grant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2750 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 3/3 privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like each amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Saharsa, in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 220 of 2023, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T