Patna High Court
Ranjan Sahani @ Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Piprakothi PS Case No. 370 of 2025) involving alleged illegal production of country-made liquor. Police, acting on secret information, raided the premises of co‑accused Nagendra Singh, but the petitioners allegedly blocked the police by cutting a tree and assaulted officers. The petitioners argued that the FIR contains general and omnibus allegations against 25 persons, no specific injury to police is recorded, and they have no prior criminal record. The prosecution opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences listed under various sections of the Bihar Non‑Compulsory (B.N.S.S.) and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act. The court, considering the lack of documented injury and the nature of the allegations, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, a family member as a bailor, and a condition of cooperation with the investigation, retaining the power to cancel bail for non‑cooperation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged assault on police and illegal liquor production despite general omnibus allegations.
- Whether the absence of recorded injury and lack of prior criminal antecedent justify the grant of bail under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal liquor
- assault on police
- omnibus FIR
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bihar
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23442 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Ranjan Sahani @ Ranjan Kumar Son of Srikant Sahani @ Srikant
Chaudhary Resident of Village - Panditpur, Malahi Tola, P.S. - Piprakothi,
Dist. - East Champaran.
2. Sabita Devi Wife of Srikant Sahani @ Srikant Chaudhary Resident of
Village - Panditpur, Malahi Tola, P.S. - Piprakothi, Dist. - East Champaran.
3. Srikant Sahani @ Srikant Chaudhary Son of Late Ramchandra Sahani
Resident of Village - Panditpur, Malahi Tola, P.S. - Piprakothi, Dist. - East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 370 of 2025 in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 223,
191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 324(4), 132, 109,
352, 351(3) of the BNS and Section 45 of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on a secret information
about the illegal production of country made liquor at the house
of co-accused Nagendra Singh, police conducted a raid. Upon
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23442 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
2/3
their arrival, the petitioners along with some known and some
unknown co-accused persons, intercepted them by cutting a tree
to block the road and subsequently, they assaulted some police
officers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as
many as 25 persons have been named in the first information
report that they, along with 15-20 unknown persons got into a
fight with the police personnel when they had come to the place
of occurrence on a confidential information about preparation
and sale of liquor. It is further submitted that there are general
and omnibus allegation in the first information report against all
the accused persons and the names of the 25 persons are stated
to have been disclosed by the local chowkidar. The bail rejection
order also does not indicate the existence of any injury and no
reference to any injury report has been made. The petitioners
have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for anticipatory bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances, and also considering the general and omnibus
allegation and their implication on the basis of disclosure made
by the local chowkidar coupled with the fact that no apparent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23442 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
3/3
injury is available on record, let the above named petitioners, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court
below within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case
No. 370 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S., subject to
the conditions that:
(I) One of the bailors will be a family member/close
relative.
(II) The petitioners shall cooperate in the
investigation/trial and in case of non-cooperation, the
prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for
cancelling the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
priyanka/-
U T
Checking your session…