Patna High Court
Ranjit RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Ranjit Rai subject to the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Ranjit Rai and his relative Indrajit @ Ranjit Rai, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with PS Bidupur Case No. 424 of 2025, which alleges offences under Sections 109, 326(a), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The second petitioner withdrew his application, leading to its dismissal, while the first petitioner sought relief fearing arrest. The prosecution contended that the petitioner had ordered the firing on an informant during a land‑dispute altercation. The court examined the allegations, the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It held that, despite the seriousness of the accusations, anticipatory bail could be granted subject to stringent conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order also stipulated bail bonds, sureties, and compliance requirements, and clarified that the observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioner Ranjit Rai despite allegations of ordering a firing and his criminal antecedent.
- Whether the withdrawal of the second petitioner’s application affects the first petitioner’s relief.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are appropriate in the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 326(a), 3(5), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- offences
- Arms Act
- land dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11706 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Ranjit Rai, Son of Late Vishuni Rai Resident of Village - Naya tola
Paharpur, Ps- Jurwanpur, Dist- Vaishali
2. Indrajit @ Ranjit Rai, son of Late Baidnath Rai Resident of Village - Naya
tola Paharpur, Ps- Jurwanpur, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. After some argument learned counsel for the
petitioner No.2, namely, Indrajit @ Ranjit Rai, submits that he
shall not be pressing the anticipatory bail application of the
petitioner no.2.
3. The application against the petitioner no.2, namely
Indrajit @ Ranjit Rai stands dismissed as not pressed.
4. So for as petitioner no.1, namely, Ranjit Rai is
concerned, he apprehends his arrest in connection with Bidupur
P.S. Case No. 424 of 2025 registered for the offences under
Sections 109, 326(a), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11706 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
5. The prosecution case is to the effect that on the
instructions of petitioner no.1, namely, Ranjit Rai, it is alleged
that the petitioner No.2, namely, Indrajeet @ Ranjit Rai had
fired upon the informant which hit on his thigh and apart from
that the other accused persons have also assaulted him.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner no.1, namely,
Ranjit Rai submits that the only allegation against the petitioner
Ranji Rai that he had directed to fire upon the informant. It has
further been submitted that the allegation is superficial in nature
and no such incident as alleged had occurred and in fact the
informant, who was the aggressor had approached the land of
the petitioner and for which one Bidupur P.S. Case No.423 of
2025 was lodged on behalf of the petitioner's side. It has next
been submitted that in the altercation that took place certain
injuries were sustained by both the sides and the cause of the
incident is said to be a land dispute between the parties. It has
lastly been submitted that the petitioner No.1 has one criminal
antecedent.
7. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail and has stated that the petitioner is the order
giver.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11706 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioner no.1, namely, Ranjit Rai 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) 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
Bidupur P.S. Case No. 424 of 2025, subject to the 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 petitioner shall be his close
relative.
(ii) The petitioner 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
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is 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 petitioner and in case at any stage it is
found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11706 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-
mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or
in the name of verification.
9. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
10. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…