Patna High Court
Ramchandra Sah @ Ram Chandra Sah @ Ramchandar SahuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court granted pre‑arrest bail to petitioners No.2‑10 but denied it to petitioner No.1, directing the latter to surrender for regular bail.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of relatives from Belsandi village, were charged in a 2024 FIR for illegal construction on the informant's land and for assaulting the informant's family, including a specific allegation that petitioner No.1 assaulted the informant's husband with an iron rod. They applied for pre‑arrest bail, claiming innocence, clean antecedents, and that the injuries were minor. The State and the informant opposed the bail. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted pre‑arrest bail to petitioners No.2 to No.10 upon furnishing a bond, but refused bail to petitioner No.1 due to the specific serious allegation, directing him to surrender and seek regular bail. The Court also ordered verification of any pending criminal cases against petitioners No.2‑10 and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted to the accused under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the allegations of illegal construction and assault.
- Whether the specific allegation of assault with an iron rod against petitioner No.1 warrants denial of pre‑arrest bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale (BNSS) — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 482(2), 74
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- assault
- illegal construction
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2474 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2024 Thana- LARJHAGHAT District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Ramchandra Sah @ Ram Chandra Sah @ Ramchandar Sahu, aged about 56
years, Sex - Male, son of Late Shivnandan Sah @ Shivnandan Sahu,
2. Ramsharan Sah @ Ram Sharan Sah @ Ram Sharan Sahu, aged about 58
years, Sex - Male, son of Late Shivnandan Sah @ Shivnandan Sahu
3. Ramdyal Sah @ Ramdayal Sah, aged about 52 years, Sex - Male, son of
Late Shivnandan Sah @ Shivnandan Sahu
4. Chandula Devi, aged about 47 years, Sex - Female, wife of Sri Ramchandra
Sah @ Ram Chandra Sah @ Ramchandar Sahu
5. Mukesh Sah @ Mukehs Kumar Sahu. aged about 43 years, Sex - Male, son
of Yogendra Sah @ Yogendra Sahu,
6. Sachin Kumar, aged about 23 years, Sex - Male, son of Sri Ramchandra Sah
@ Ram Chandra Sah @ Ramchandar Sahu
7. Pintu Sah @ Pintu Kumar Sah, aged about 40 years, Sex - Male, son of
Ramanand Sah @ Ramnandan Sah
8. Dilkhush Kumar @ Dilkhus Kumar, aged about 25 Years, Sex - Male, son of
Sri Ramdyal Sah @ Ramdayal Sah
9. Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Sah, aged about 30 years, Sex - Male, son of
Sri Ramsharan Sah @ Ram Sharan Sah @ Ram Sharan Sahu
10. Meera Devi @ Mira Devi, aged about 40 years, Sex - Female, wife of Manoj
Sah @ Manoj Sahu.
All are resident of Village-Belsandi, Ward No. 10, PS.- Larjharghat, District-
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, Advocate
Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate
Mrs. Nitu Kumari, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Nikil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
Mr. Keshav Bhardwaj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 11-05-2026 Heard Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Anant Kumar 1,
learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2474 of 2026(5) dt.11-05-2026
2/4
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Larjhaghat P.S. Case No. 68 of 2024 corresponding to G.R.
No. 1193 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109(1), 74,
303(2), 352, 351(2), (3) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegations made in the FIR, the
petitioners were illegally raising construction over the land of
the informant, and when the informant and her family members
protested against the same, the petitioners had allegedly
assaulted them, causing injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have
falsely been implicated in the present case. Specific allegation
of assaulting the husband of the informant is against petitioner
no. 1. General and omnibus allegation has been levelled against
the other petitioners. Injuries sustained by the informant side
have been opined by the doctor to be simple in nature.
Petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioners
seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
pre-arrest bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2474 of 2026(5) dt.11-05-2026
3/4
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, considering the fact that general and
omnibus allegation has been levelled against petitioners no. 2 to
10, they are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District
Court within a period of four weeks from today, 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
District Court where the case is pending, in connection with
Larjhaghat P.S. Case No. 68 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No.
1193 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. So far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, considering
the fact that specific allegation against him that he had assaulted
the husband of the informant on his head by means of iron rod
causing injury, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner no. 1
on pre-arrest bail.
8. However, the petitioner no. 1, if so advised, may
surrender before the learned District Court and seek regular bail.
In that case, the learned District Court may consider to disposed
of the bail application of the petitioner no. 1 on the same day on
the basis of material which has come in course of investigation.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2474 of 2026(5) dt.11-05-2026
4/4
9. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners no. 2 to 10 as stated
in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners no. 2 to 10 as what has been
stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force
automatically.
10. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.