Patna High Court
Dhiraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhiraj Kumar, was arrested on 5 February 2026 in connection with a 2024 FIR alleging assault that resulted in the informant's father's leg being cut, invoking IPC sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 109 and 504. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the FIR contains a general allegation and a specific one, and that the injury was simple and part of a case‑and‑counter‑case dispute. He also highlighted that a co‑accused, Ram Ratan Yadav, had been granted bail by a coordinate bench of the same court. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the specific allegation and the petitioner’s involvement in three other cases, though he was on bail in two of them. The court, noting the case‑and‑counter‑case context and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the District & Additional Sessions Judge‑III, Lakhisarai.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences under the IPC.
- Whether the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case and the bail granted to a co‑accused justify granting bail to the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s pending cases affect his eligibility for bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 147, 149, 307, 323, 324, 341, 504
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- criminal procedure
- case and counter case
- coordinate bench
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20960 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2024 Thana- MEDNI CHAUKI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Dhiraj Kumar S/o Daroga Yadav R/o Village - Sadhbaba Asthan Mohanpur,
P.S - Mednichauki, District - Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-03-2026 Heard Mr. Umesh Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
05.02.2026, in connection with Mednichowki P.S. Case No. 74
of 2024, F.I.R. dated 06.04.2024 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 109,
504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has
assaulted to the father of the informant by means of kachiya
from which leg was cut.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20960 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/4
that the F.I.R. is in two parts, in first part, there is general and
omnibus allegation against the petitioner and in second part,
there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has
assaulted to the father of the informant by means of kachiya
from which the leg was cut and other co-accused person,
namely, Golu @ Chhotu has assaulted on the head of the father
of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that although the father of the informant has received injury but
the injury inflicted upon the father of the informant is simple in
nature and there is case and counter case between the parties.
He further submits that co-accused person, namely, Ram Ratan
Yadav @ Ratan Yadav has been granted bail by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.09.2024 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 45474 of 2024. The petitioner is in custody since
05.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears
that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner
that he has assaulted to the father of the informant and apart
from that the petitioner carries three more cases other than than
the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20960 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
3/4
the bail petition that out of three cases, the petitioner is on bail
in two cases and one case is pending for consideration before
the competent court of law.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that there is case and counter case between the
parties and co-accused person has been granted bail by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court, let the petitioner, above named,
be released 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 learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge-III, Lakhisarai in connection with Mednichowki
P.S. Case No. 74 of 2024, subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20960 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
4/4
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…