Patna High Court
Ritik Kumar @ Ritik RawatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and conditions, finding the contradictions in the evidence sufficient to justify bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ritik Kumar, was charged under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109 and 118(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, for allegedly assaulting an informant’s brother, resulting in a reported head injury. During investigation, the charge of murder (Section 302 IPC/Section 103(1) BNS) was added. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the case diary, CCTV footage and the post‑mortem report, which showed no external injuries and a cause of death as cardiac‑respiratory failure, contradicted the FIR. The State opposed bail, relying on the same post‑mortem findings to assert the seriousness of the offence. The Court noted the inconsistency between the FIR and medical evidence and, considering the petitioner’s willingness to comply with conditions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs 30,000 and other conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case where the FIR alleges assault causing head injury but the post‑mortem report shows no external injuries and attributes death to cardiac‑respiratory failure.
- Whether the addition of a murder charge (Section 302 IPC/Section 103(1) BNS) precludes the grant of anticipatory bail under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 2(1)(d), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- murder
- post-mortem report
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- evidence contradiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13569 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2025 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui
======================================================
Ritik Kumar @ Ritik Rawat S/o- Arun Rawat @ Arun Ravat Vill- Sohjana
Rawat Tola, P.S- Jhajha, Dist- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 247 of 2025, dated 25.05.2025,
lodged under Section 115(2), 126(2), 109 & 118(2) of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS,
2023”).
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged
against the present petitioner alleging that the petitioner
assaulted the informant’s brother, Mohit Kumar, as a result of
which he sustained a head injury, fell down, and was thereafter
taken to hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13569 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
the present case, subsequently Section 302 of the Indian Penal
Code/Section 103(1) of the BNS has been added. Counsel
further submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed
no offence. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent
of the petitioner is not clean, as two criminal cases are pending
against him in which he is on bail. Counsel further submits that
during investigation, materials have come on record in the case
diary which would show that the petitioner is innocent. Counsel
further submits that the person who was sitting with him on the
motorcycle, as mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the case
diary, is in contradiction with the fardbeyan. Counsel further
submits that, as per paragraph 26 relating to CCTV footage, the
incident/accident has been identified. Counsel further submits
that for this reason the case diary has been called for, including
the post-mortem report. Counsel also submits that the petitioner
is ready to abide by and fulfill all the conditions that may be
imposed.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that the case diary has been
called for and, from the post-mortem report, it has been
indicated that no external injury has been found on the body and
that the cause of death is cardiac respiratory failure. Counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13569 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
fairly submits that, in light of the post-mortem report and the
case diary, the fardbeyan does not appear to be correct.
6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case,
as well as considering the contradiction in the FIR regarding the
alleged head injury and the post-mortem report, wherein it has
been found that there is no external injury on the entire body, let
the above-named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a
period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section
2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial
Magistrate (CJM), Jamui, in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case
No. 247 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s
482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…