Patna High Court
Suraj Ray @ Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Suraj Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several sections of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.). He alleged that he was falsely implicated through a re‑statement made by the informant sixteen days after the incident, whereas the FIR did not name him. The informant’s re‑statement implicated the petitioner along with other accused persons in the alleged assault and death of his son during a Tazia procession. The State opposed the bail on the ground that the petitioner might abscond, but the petitioner assured cooperation with the investigation. The High Court, after considering the circumstances, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under section 438(2) of the CrPC and section 482(2) of the B.N.S., while reserving the right of the trial court to cancel the bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under section 438(2) of the CrPC and section 482(2) of the B.N.S. despite the allegations of false implication.
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- FIR re‑statement
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure
- bail conditions
- investigation cooperation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15817 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2025 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Suraj Ray @ Suraj Kumar S/o- Nawal Kishore Ray R/v- Amwa Bada Po Ps-
Mehsi Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3),
126(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109 of the B.N.S.
3. The Investigating Officer of the case in compliance
of the order dated 24.03.2026 is present in the Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases, out of which, two cases
are under the Excise Act and the informant alleges that on eve of
Tazia, his son had gone out to Kankatti market in the procession
on 06.07.2025, further, at 6 P.M. the informant received an
information that occurrence of assault had taken place in the
procession, thus he went to the place of occurrence and saw
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15817 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/5
Rajesh, Vasant, Chandan, Pankaj, Jagesh, Bhola, Vikash,
Abhishek, Jitu and Sonu were taking his son on a motorcycle
with an intent to kill him, being afraid, the informant came back
home and informed his neighbour, thereafter, he received a call
from his son’s mobile and the caller said that his son would be
killed and is lying near water tank, accordingly he reached the
place of occurrence and saw his son lying in an injured
condition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
informant alleges that he received an information that an
occurrence of assault has been taken place in Tazia procession,
accordingly, he went to the place of occurrence and saw the
named accused persons taking his son away on a motorcycle
and out of fear he came back home and informed his neighbour
and thereafter he received a call that his son would be killed, it
is next submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR but then
he came to be implicated based on the re-statement of the
informant recorded by the police after institution of the instant
FIR, after 16 days of the occurrence, re-statement of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15817 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/5
informant is recorded at para 53 of the case diary. It is next
submitted that no doubt the son of the informant died during the
course of treatment but then the petitioner was not involved in
the occurrence. It is further submitted that on the day of Tazia
procession, an altercation had taken place, on account of which
the deceased had assaulted the cousin brother and father of the
petitioner, on account of assault, the cousin brother of the
petitioner died on the spot and the intestine of the father of the
petitioner came out as such, he was rushed to the hospital, it is
submitted that since it was the day of festivity and the son of the
informant had assaulted two persons and one person died and
other was seriously injured, as such the mob gathered and
assaulted the son of the informant injuring him. It is next
submitted that since cousin brother of the petitioner died and his
father became injured hence, the informant by way of
afterthought implicated the petitioner in his re-statement
recorded at para 53 of the case diary after 16 days of the
occurrence. It is also submitted that informant in the F.I.R. has
specifically named the accused persons whom he saw taking
away his son on motorcycle but then the petitioner was not
implicated in the F.I.R. but in his re-statement the informant by
way of afterthought apart from implicating the petitioner also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15817 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
4/5
implicated many other accused persons.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may
abscond on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the investigation.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail
to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner, as named above, in the event of
his arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Motihari at East
Champaran, in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 184 of
2025, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
9. However, it is made clear that if the investigating
officer of the case file an application before the learned trial
Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite giving
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15817 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
5/5
assurance to this Court is not cooperating in the investigation, in
that event, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the
bail bond of the petitioner after recording the reason.
10. The personal appearance of the I.O. of the case is
dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
sanjeev/-
U
Checking your session…