Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar Jha @ Sanjay JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners with conditions, finding no sufficient ground to deny bail.
Summary
Petitioners Sanjay Kumar Jha and Raman Kumar Jha sought anticipatory bail after an FIR (ABR No.3154/2025) alleged they assaulted informant Binod Jha with a sword, iron rod and by climbing on his chest, causing a simple 3 cm cut on the forehead. The petitioners argued the incident stemmed from a minor land dispute and that the injury was minor, while the informant’s counsel emphasized the seriousness of the assault. The Court noted the injury was simple, the petitioners had no prior criminal record, and the allegations did not warrant denial of bail. Accordingly, the Court exercised its power under Section 438(2) of the CrPC to grant anticipatory bail, subject to a set of conditions including surety, regular appearance before police and court, and non‑interference with witnesses. The bail order was to remain effective for four weeks from the date of the order, with further compliance requirements for six months.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged assault offences under the IPC.
- Whether the nature of the injury and the petitioners' lack of criminal antecedent justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 127(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- assault
- Indian Penal Code
- land dispute
- simple injury
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7222 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- KARPURIGRAM District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Sanjay Kumar Jha @ Sanjay Jha S/o Laxmikant Jha Resident of Village-
Bishanpur, PS- Karpuri Gram, Distt.- Samastipur
2. Raman Kumar Jha @ Raman Kumar @ Shooter S/o Naveen Kumar Jha
Resident of Village- Bishanpur, PS- Karpuri Gram, Distt.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Udit Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP
For the informant : Ms. Sonia Narayan Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard Mr.Udit Narayan Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Ms. Sonia Narayan Sinha, learned counsel
for the informant beside the learned APP.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Α.Β.Ρ. No.3154/2025 arising out of Karpuri
Gram P.S. Case No.102/2025 U/s 126(2), 127(2), 115(2),
117(2), 118(1), 109(1), 351(2) and 352 B.N.S. lodged on
10.09.2025 by the informant, Binod Jha.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that while he was sitting at his door, all the accused persons
armed variously wanted him to vacate the house. Upon protest,
the allegation is that firstly Raman Kumar Jha gave sword blow
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7222 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
on the head which followed Sanjay Kumar Jha assaulting by
iron rod on the neck. Navin Kumar Jha (not before this Court)
climbed on his chest and pressed leading to blood oozing out
from his nose and mouth. Allegation of assault on the other part
has also been alleged. He was shifted to Sadar Hospital,
Samastipur which followed the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
there is land dispute between the parties, a minor dispute took
place which has been exaggerated which can be reflected from
the fact that a single injury of 3cm cut has been found on the
forehead and the Doctor has opined it to be simple in nature.
5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other
hand has taken this Court to the FIR to show that not only
assault took place, one of the accused namely Navin Kumar Jha
climbed on the chest of the informant with intention to kill him.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
parties as also the fact that the injury inflicted has been found to
be simple in nature and the petitioners do not have criminal
antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend
them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail, in the event
of their arrest or surrender before the concerned court within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7222 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
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 the like amount each in connection with Α.Β.Ρ.
No.3154/2025 arising out of Karpuri Gram P.S. Case
No.102/2025 to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st
Class cum Additional Munsif, Samastipur subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as
also the other conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) The petitioners shall be appearing before the
police station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) 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;
(iv) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for next six months to mark their
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7222 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
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;
(vi) 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)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…