Patna High Court
Jai Ram ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., subject to specified monetary, procedural, and conduct conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers from Rohtas district, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a FIR (Rajpur PS Case No. 146 of 2024) that alleged their involvement in violent clashes and listed multiple IPC offences. The prosecution alleged that the accused attacked police and were identified by a chowkidar, while the petitioners claimed the allegations were an omnibus charge stemming from personal enmity with the chowkidar. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioners' criminal antecedents, but the court noted that similar persons had previously been granted anticipatory bail in other matters. Considering the petitioners' willingness to contribute Rs. 2,000 each to the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund and the precedent of earlier bail orders, the court decided to extend anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The bail order required a cash bond, sureties, regular appearances before the trial court and police, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or committing further offences.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code to grant anticipatory bail in a case involving multiple IPC offences and an omnibus allegation?
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail?
- Whether the condition of contributing to the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund is a valid condition for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 125(A), 125(B), 127(1), 132, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- omnibus allegation
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Indian Penal Code
- relief fund contribution
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.501 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2024 Thana- RAJPUR District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Jai Ram Choudhary S/o Mahanth Choudhary R/o vill - Shrinagar Tola, P.s.-
Baghaila, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram
2. Shekhar Choudhary S/o Mahanth Choudhary R/o vill - Shrinagar Tola, P.s.-
Baghaila, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram
3. Amit Choudhary @ Amarjeet Kumar Choudhary S/o Jairam Choudhary R/o
vill - Shrinagar Tola, P.s.- Baghaila, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 146 of 2024 for the
offence under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 127(1), 115(2),
109, 132, 352, 125(A) and 125(B) of the BNS Act lodged on
29.08.2024 by the informant, Lal Babu Ram.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police got
information that there has been clashes between the parties
and when reached the place, the Policemen were attacked.
The ‘chowkidar’ identified the accused persons, petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.501 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
included. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
omnibus allegation has been made against them, only due to
enmity with the chowkidar, implicated and they have no role
to play in the matter. He further submits that without
accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present
petition, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that he
intends to contribute Rs. 2,000/- each (totalling Rs. 6,000/-) to
the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
two of the petitioners have criminal antecedent.
6. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
as also that earlier some of the accused persons have been
given benefit of anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No. 89475 of
2024 (Lalji Chaudhary) and in Cr. Misc. No. 36 of 2025 (Raju
Paswan and Anr.) and omnibus allegation is there against
these petitioners, in that background, this Court is inclined to
extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions
subject to payment of Rs. 2,000/- each (totalling Rs. 6,000/-)
to the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund through Demand Draft
and the receipt be submitted to the learned trial Court.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.501 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to
the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class,
Bikramganj (Rohtas) in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No.
146 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document (Aadhaar Card/Voter ID card/Pan Card/Driving
License) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall appear before the
concerned police station every fortnight for six months to
mark their attendance and after the end of the period, the
certificate shall be submitted before the Trial Court failing
which steps shall be taken for the cancellation of the bail
bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.501 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…