Patna High Court

Radheshyam RamversusThe State of Bihar

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

Holding

The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Radheshyam Ram, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, along with three others, assaulted an informant with a lathi, causing a head injury. The petitioner contended that the injury was trivial, he has no prior criminal record, and he would cooperate with the investigation. The informant’s counsel produced a counter‑affidavit and a CT‑scan report showing a fracture of the parietal bone, contradicting the petitioner’s claim. After examining the FIR, injury report, and medical evidence, the court found a direct allegation against the petitioner and deemed the injury serious, consequently rejecting the anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged assault and serious head injury
Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses
Whether the nature and severity of the injury justify denial of bail under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal procedure
assault
injury report
CT scan
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6816 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2025 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Radheshyam Ram Son of Shripati Ram Resident of village - Gaudarh, P.S.-
                 Sahpur, District - Bhojpur
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   29-04-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                  2. The petitioner in this application prays for grant of

                   anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with

                   Sahpur P.S.Case no. 100 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2)

                   and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

                                   3. As per the prosecution case, the four named

                   accused persons including the petitioner herein are said to have

                   come with variously armed and they started to abuse the

                   informant. The informant further states that on asking the

                   accused not to abuse, the petitioner is said to have assaulted

                   with the lathi on his head as a result of which he fell down.

                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The injury

                   report enclosed with the case diary states the injury to be simple
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6816 of 2026(6) dt.29-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                    in nature. It is a matter of trivial fight between the parties. The

                    petitioner has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to

                    cooperate in the investigation/trial.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

                    APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                    Learned counsel for the informant referring to the counter

                    affidavit filed and the injury report as also the CT scan report

                    brought on record submits that fracture of the parietal bone has

                    been found.

                                 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                    having perused the material on record, it transpires that there is

                    direct allegation against the petitioner in the FIR. Further the

                    injury report in the case diary also refers to CT scan of the brain

                    with the patient ID therein. The CT scan report with the same

                    patient ID as mentioned therein has been brought on record in

                    the counter affidavit which shows fracture of the parietal bone.

                                 7. In view of the facts of the case, the Court is not

                    inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is

                    rejected.


Bibhash                                                        (Partha Sarthy, J)
U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…