Patna High Court
Ranjeet ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to all petitioners, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, five members of the Chaudhary family, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No. 665/2025 alleging assault with an iron rod and demolition of a hut, offences listed under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 74, 117(2) and 110 of the B.N.S. The FIR specifically implicates petitioner No.1, Ranjeet Chaudhary, while the other petitioners are alleged only in a general manner. The petitioners argued that the injuries reported were simple, the allegations stem from a personal family dispute, and only petitioner No.1 has prior criminal records unrelated to the present case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the facts, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., including bail bonds, sureties, personal presence at trial, and verification of antecedents. The order emphasized that the bail conditions are not to be delayed for verification and that any observations made are not binding during trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations in FIR No. 665/2025.
- Whether the specific allegations against petitioner No.1 extend to the other family members.
- Whether the nature of the injuries and prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 110, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352, 482(2), 74
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- assault
- family dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33545 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-665 Year-2025 Thana- WARISLIGANJ District- Nawada
======================================================
1. Ranjeet Chaudhary S/o Late Gano Chaudhary R/o Village- Sultanpur, PS-
Warisaliganj, Distt- Nawada
2. Mantu Chaudhary s/o Late Gano Chaudhary R/o Village- Sultanpur, PS-
Warisaliganj, Distt- Nawada
3. Sonu Chaudhary S/o Ranjeet Chaudhary R/o Village- Sultanpur, PS-
Warisaliganj, Distt- Nawada
4. Munni Devi W/o Ranjeet Chaudhary R/o Village- Sultanpur, PS-
Warisaliganj, Distt- Nawada
5. Nibha Devi W/o Mantu Chaudhary R/o Village- Sultanpur, PS- Warisaliganj,
Distt- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State through Virtual Mode.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Warsaliganj P.S. Case No. 665/2025 dated 24.12.2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 351(2), 352, 74, 117(2) and 110 of the B.N.S.
3. As per the F.I.R., the allegation against the
petitioners is that the F.I.R. named accused persons including the
petitioners came to the house of the informant and started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33545 of 2026(2) dt.19-05-2026
2/4
assaulting her brother-in-law (Devar) and when she tried to
intervene, the petitioner no. 1 Ranjeet Chaudhary is stated to have
assaulted on her head by an iron rod. It has further alleged that her
Devar, namely, Rajiv Chaudhary came to her rescue but even he
was assaulted and the animal hut was demolished by the
petitioner no. 1.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that as
far as the allegations are concerned, it is specifically directed
towards petitioner no. 1 while there is no specific overt act
alleged against the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 and they are
general and omnibus in nature. It has further been submitted that
though there is an allegation of assault by an iron rod on the head
of the informant by the petitioner no. 1, however, as it would
appear from the perusal of the injury report which has been
brought on record by way of Annexure-2 series, it would be
evident that the injury was found to be simple in nature. It has
next been submitted that the injury sustained by the Devar of the
informant, namely, Rajiv Chaudhary was also found to be simple
in nature. It has further been submitted that the petitioners and
the informant are agnates and on account of some personal
disputes, the entire family has been implicated in this case on
false and concocted story. It has lastly been submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33545 of 2026(2) dt.19-05-2026
3/4
petitioner no. 1 has two criminal antecedents, but both under the
Excise Act, while rest of the petitioners have clean antecedents.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
the petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on
furnishing bail-bonds 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 Warsaliganj P.S. Case No. 665/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of
BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and
shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33545 of 2026(2) dt.19-05-2026
4/4
will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedents
of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is found that the
petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the trial
court shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bonds of
the petitioners. 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.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/Anjali
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.