Patna High Court
Ravi Kumar Pandit @ Ravi RanjanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail must be denied as the accusations against the petitioner are specific, direct, and involve serious offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravi Kumar Pandit, was implicated in an FIR alleging his participation in a violent assault during a panchayat meeting over a land dispute, which resulted in the death of the informant's father. The FIR charges him alongside other accused under several sections of the B.N.S., alleging that he helped restrain the victim, facilitating the homicide. The petitioner contended that he was innocent, had no role in the assault, and sought anticipatory bail, asserting clean antecedents. The State and the informant opposed the bail, emphasizing the specific accusations and the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the direct nature of the allegations and the gravity of the crimes, concluding that the petitioner’s involvement was sufficiently alleged to deny bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the FIR
- Whether the specific allegations and gravity of the offences justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- assault
- homicide
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
- bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5007 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ravi Kumar Pandit @ Ravi Ranjan S/O Umed Lal Pandit R/O Village- Sarari,
P.S- Mohanpur, Distt.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Praween Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Kavish Kumar Patel, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Prabhu Narayan Prabhakar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118(2), 109, 103(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that due to old land
dispute, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this
petitioner, called informant’s father and mother to settle the
matter through panchayati and in course of panchayati between
the parties, there was hot talk between informant’s father and
co-accused Umed Lal Pandit and thereafter, all the accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5007 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
persons dragged them in the house and brutally assaulted. It is
specifically alleged that co-accused Umed Lal Pandit pressed
the neck of informant’s father, whereas co-accused Indu
Bhushan Pandit assaulted on the chest of informant’s father with
brick and this petitioner, along with co-accused Uma Shankar
Pandit and Arun Pandit were catching hands & legs of
informant’s father, on account of which, father of informant died
on spot and informant’s mother sustained some injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on account of long
standing land dispute, petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case. It is further submitted that from bare perusal of the
F.I.R. it is apparent that this petitioner is not alleged to have
assaulted the deceased. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and
submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific
accusation that all the accused persons assaulted father and
mother of informant due to which father of informant died on
the spot. This petitioner caught hold of hands of father of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5007 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
informant and thereby, facilitated in commission of the offence.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…