Patna High Court

Ramashankar SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 29 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Ramashankar Sah, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging he assaulted an informant with an iron rod causing grievous injuries. The prosecution contended that the petitioner, along with others, inflicted serious injuries on the informant. The petitioner argued he is a specially enabled person, was falsely implicated, and has no prior criminal record, offering to cooperate with the investigation. The State and the informant opposed the bail, emphasizing the direct allegation and the injury report documenting multiple grievous injuries. After hearing both sides and reviewing the FIR and injury report, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations of assault and grievous injuries under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Whether the petitioner’s claim of being a specially enabled person and false implication warrants bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
assault
grievous injury
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27574 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2026 Thana- BYPASS District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Ramashankar Sah Son of Late Jagpati Sah Resident of village - Jamua,
                 P.O.and P.S.-Bihiyan,, District-Bhojpur. At present resident of Maharani
                 Colony, Agamkuan Road No.1, P.S.- Bypass, District-Patna
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
                 For the Informant       :        Mr. Arvind Kumar Mouar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-04-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection

                   with Bypass P.S. Case no.44 of 2026 registered under sections

                   126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to

                   have assaulted the informant with an iron rod on his head. Other

                   accused persons are also said to have assaulted causing serious

                   injuries.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner who is a specially enabled person has been falsely

                   implicated in the case. With respect to an occurrence which has

                   taken place on 27.1.2026, without any reasonable explanation
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27574 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     for the delay, statement before the police was given on

                     31.1.2026 and the FIR registered on 5.2.2026. The petitioner has

                     no criminal antecedent and undertakes to cooperate in the

                     investigation.

                                  5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by

                     learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the

                     informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant

                     that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having

                     assaulted the informant with an iron rod. Referring to the order

                     of the learned trial Court, it is submitted that as a result of the

                     assault on the informant, he sustained multiple grievous injuries.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in

                     the F.I.R. together with the injury report of the informant having

                     been mentioned in paragraph no.52 of the case diary which

                     finds mention in the order of the learned trial Court of the

                     informant having sustained corresponding multiple grievous

                     injuries, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

                     anticipatory bail and the application is rejected.



                                                 (Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…