Patna High Court
Bhikhari RaiversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner’s involvement in a serious murder case warranted denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhikhari Rai, sought anticipatory bail in a murder case (Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act) filed in 2022, alleging he has no criminal antecedents. The FIR, lodged by the victim's father, named the petitioner among the accused in the murder of his son. The petitioner argued that the delay of three and a half years in approaching the court should not prejudice his bail request. The State opposed, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the lapse in time. The court considered the presence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and the nature of the offences, and concluded that bail was not appropriate, thereby rejecting the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a murder case under Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7109 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2022 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Bhikhari Rai S/O Ramayodhya Rai R/O Vill.- Fulwariya, P.s.- Kalaiya,
District- Bara, Nepal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Chhauradano (Mahuwa) P.S. Case No. 257 of 2022
instituted under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
27 of the Arms Act lodged on 30.07.2022 by the informant,
Chetnanand Kumar Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the allegation in the
FIR shows that on getting a telephonic call, his son went outside
and informed that he is going for a dinner party. As he failed to
return, next day came the news about his murder. The informant
gave the names of the accused whose role he expected in the
murder of his son, the petitioner included. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7109 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/2
do not have criminal antecedent and has been implicated in this
case.
5. Learned APP on the other hand opposes the prayer
submitting that the matter is of the year 2022, the petitioner was
named in the FIR but chose three and half years to knock the
doors of the Court.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the fact that his name is there in the case of murder of the son of
the informant and the matter is of the year 2022, it would be
appropriate that he seek bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.