Patna High Court
Lal Babu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438(2) of the CrPC with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, members of the Rai family, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Raghopur PS Case No. 232 of 2025) involving alleged assaults and theft, where other family members (Suggi Rai, Bhullu Rai, Mukesh Rai) were implicated. The prosecution alleged that the accused, acting with common intention, assaulted the informant and his wife, causing injuries, and stole a gold chain. The petitioners argued they had no specific role or criminal antecedent, and the accused persons were not before the court. The court examined the allegations, noted that the petitioners were not directly implicated, and considered the provisions of Section 438(2) of the CrPC. It granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to a cash bond, sureties, and strict conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and refraining from further offences. The order was pronounced by Justice Rajiv Roy.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC despite the alleged involvement of other family members in the offences.
- Whether the petitioners can be considered to have a role in the alleged offences sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115, 117, 126, 303, 351, 352, 75
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- common intention
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20865 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Lal Babu Rai S/O Suggi Rai. Resident of Saidabad, P.S-Raghaopur, District-
Vaishali.
2. Rubi Devi W/O Bhullu Rai. Resident of Saidabad, P.S-Raghaopur, District-
Vaishali.
3. Darpaniya Devi @ Darpan Devi W/O Suggi Rai. Resident of Saidabad, P.S-
Raghaopur, District-Vaishali.
4. Ashok Rai @ Ashokh Rai S/O Jamahir Rai Resident of Saidabad, P.S-
Raghaopur, District-Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
For the informant : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned Counsel for
the petitioners and Mr. Ranjit Kumar for the informant besides
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 232 of 2025 for the offence
registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 117(4), 109,
75, 303(2), 352, 351(3)/ 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on the minor problem between the children, the elders
intervened and the allegation is that on the order of Suggi Rai,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20865 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
Bhullu Rai attacked the informant by the handle of the water
pump causing injury on his right hand which got fractured.
Further, the wife of the informant was assaulted by Mukesh Rai
by the handle of the water pump causing head injury to her.
Allegation against Jamahir Rai is of taking away gold chain
while Mukesh Rai and Ravi Kumar misbehaved with the
informant’s daughter. As villagers started coming, the accused
persons resorted to pelting stones. The injured were shifted to
PMCH, which followed the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that
admittedly, the role has been assigned to Suggi Rai as an order
giver, Bhullu Rai of attacking the informant as also Mukesh Rai
of assaulting the wife. So far as the injury of informant is
concerned, it has been found to be simple in nature while that of
the wife has been recorded as grievous. The submission is that
none of these accused are before this Court rather the other
family members have come who have no criminal antecedent
and no specific role assigned.
5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other
hand submits that with common intention, they resorted to
assault which also reflects from the FIR.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20865 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
the facts that have been recorded above which shows that Suggi
Rai, Bhullu Rai and Mukesh Rai are part and parcel of the
attack, they are not before this Court, no specific role has been
assigned to these petitioners, in that background, this Court is
inclined to grant them the anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioners in the event of arrest or
surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of the order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M.,
Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No.
232 of 2025 subject to condition as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
members/relatives of the petitioners, who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID)
to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail
bond by the Trial court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20865 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…