Patna High Court
Madan Rai @ Madan RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioners subject to strict conditions, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Madan Rai and Sudhir Rai, sought bail in connection with a 2014 FIR alleging offences under various IPC sections and the SC/ST Act. The FIR alleged that the accused, including the petitioners, assaulted an informant's husband, but the petitioners contended that the allegations against them were vague and that the specific assault charge pertained to another co‑accused. The prosecution opposed the bail application, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The court noted the petitioners' clean antecedent and the lack of a specific allegation of assault against them, and exercised its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC to grant bail. Bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, cooperation with the trial, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence, with provisions for cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the CrPC given the nature of the allegations and their antecedent.
- Whether the lack of a specific allegation of assault against the petitioners warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 308/34, 323, 324, 325, 341
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i)(x)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC offences
- SC/ST Act
- false FIR
- criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4284 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2014 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Madan Rai @ Madan Ray Son of Late Rajeshwar Ray Resident of Village-
Mohaddipur, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran
2. Sudhir Rai @ Sudhir Kumar Son of Prem Rai @ Premchandra Prasad
Resident of Village- Mohaddipur, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-02-2026 Heard Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 265 of 2014, F.I.R.
dated 14.10.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 148, 149, 341, ,323, 324, 325, 504 of the IPC and Section
3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act, but cognizance has taken only for the
offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 308/34 of the IPC.
3. According to prosecution case, on 13.10.2014, all
the accused persons including the petitioners armed with
weapons came at the door of the informant and abused taking
case name and assaulted her husband for casting vote of their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4284 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
choice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not
committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further
submits that from perusal of the FIR, it appears that specific
allegation of assault is against co-accused Sunil Yadav, the
allegation of assault against the petitioners with lathi, danda is
general and omnibus in nature.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that petitioners have clean antecedent and there is no specific
allegation of assault against the pettioners, let the petitioners,
above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of thirty days from the date of
receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M., 1 st Class,
Sikrahana at Dhaka, East Champaran, in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4284 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
Chiraiya P.S. Case No. 265 of 2014, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioners 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.
ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…