Patna High Court
Ravin Choudhary @ Navin ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravin Choudhary, sought bail in a case alleging rape, assault, and robbery under multiple sections of the B.N.S.S. He contended that the FIR was false, alleging a financial dispute between the informant's husband and his brothers, and that the police had exonerated the other co‑accused. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court noted that the injury to the informant was a fractured right hand and that the other brothers had been cleared, while the petitioner remained under suspicion. Considering the circumstances, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. despite the serious nature of the alleged offences
- Whether the alleged false FIR and exoneration of co‑accused affect the bail decision
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents warrant bail or its cancellation
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 329(3), 329(4), 3(5), 351(3), 352, 482(2), 77
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false FIR
- exoneration
- B.N.S.S.
- rape
- assault
- robbery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20558 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- Kanaria District- Saharsa
======================================================
Ravin Choudhary @ Navin Choudhary Son of Late Kapildev Choudhary
Resident Of Village - Agardih, P.S. - Kanaria, Dist. - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Samrendra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Kanaria P.S. Case No. 01 of 2025, for allegedly
having committed offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
118(1), 109, 77, 303(2), 329(3), 329(4), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of
the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case which is based on
the fardbeyan of the informant Savita Kumari, on 27.12.2024
her neighbours named in the first information report, who are
full brothers, entered into the house of the informant with an
intention to commit rape and on Hulla, she was assaulted with
kick, fists and iron rod by all the accused persons. It was further
alleged that the co-accused persons also snatched gold nose pin,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20558 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
earring and chain from the informant and fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that all the accused persons named in the first information report
are full brothers and during course of investigation, the Police
has found the allegation against his four brothers to be not true.
He further submits that the true fact is that the husband of the
informant had taken Rs. 25,000/- as a loan from the co-accused
persons for treatment of his ailing father, but, since he was not
returning the said amount, the accused persons were regularly
asking for refund of the said money and with a view to grab the
said money, the present first information report has been lodged.
The petitioner has got clean antecedent.
5. The learned APP for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and after
going through the record, it appears that other co-accused have
been exonerated by the Police during course of investigation,
however, the petitioner has not been exonerated. From perusal
of the impugned order dated 07.11.2025 passed by the Learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge-I, Saharsa, it would
transpire that the injury suffered by the informant was on her
right hand, which was fractured. Considering the facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20558 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in
the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in
connection with Kanaria P.S. Case No. 01 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S., with further condition:
(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it
is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps for 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.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
AjayMishra/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.