Patna High Court
Deodas @ Raj Kumar @ Raja Babu @ Deodas KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The anticipatory bail application was rejected.
Summary
The petitioner, Deodas et al., sought anticipatory bail after an FIR (Case No. 396 of 2025) was lodged alleging offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The informant claimed the accused created an obstacle, brandished a knife and stole a gold chain, after which the informant was assaulted. The petitioner argued that the FIR was fabricated to save the informant’s skin, while the State contended that the petitioner has a criminal antecedent and was involved in the assault. The court examined the nature of the allegations and the submissions of both sides. Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the lack of sufficient grounds for anticipatory bail, the court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the FIR and the alleged offences
- Whether the allegations constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Penal Code
- section 126
- section 115
- section 303
- section 352
- section 351
- section 3
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17147 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Deodas @ Raj Kumar @ Raja Babu @ Deodas Kumar R/v- Ramesh Ram
R/v- Nawadih Ps- Akodhigola Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Sarita Kumari, Advocate
: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 Heard Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Akodhigola P.S. Case No. 396 of 2025
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on
08.10.2025 by the informant Diwakar Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that accused persons were creating obstacle and later, one of
them pointed out knife and took gold chain worth a Lakh. As he
recognized some of the accused, the informant was given belt
treatment. This led to the F.I.R..
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17147 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is case and counter case and only to save his skin, the
present F.I.R. has been lodged.
5. Learned APP on the other hand opposes the prayer
submitting that not only he has criminal antecedent, after he
recognized the petitioner, was assaulted.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the nature of allegation, it would be appropriate that the
petitioner seek bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…