Patna High Court
Ranjit RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjit Rai, feared arrest in a case registered under Sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, where the FIR alleged that Bhullu Rai threatened an informant to marry her and subsequently killed the informant's three‑year‑old son. The petitioner was not named in the FIR; his name appeared only in Bhullu Rai's confessional statement, which the court held to have no evidentiary value. Ranjit Rai sought anticipatory bail on the basis of parity with a co‑accused, Om Kumar, who had been granted such relief. The State opposed the relief. The High Court, applying Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, and ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita despite not being named in the FIR.
- Whether the confessional statement of Bhullu Rai can be used to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103, 3(5), 482(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- provisional bail
- parity principle
- clean antecedent
- confessional statement
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73263 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-315 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ranjit Rai S/o Nandu Rai R/o Village - Jafrabad, P.S - Rustampur, District -
Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Soni Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lalan Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 61(2)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted
that in sum and substance the allegation in the FIR is that Bhullu
Rai was extending threat to the informant to marry him failing
which her son would be killed and on refusal of the informant to
marry Bhullu Rai, Bhullu Rai killed her three year old minor
son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73263 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Bhullu Rai in police custody, which
does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that
similarly situated co-accused Om Kumar had approached this
Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 57935 of
2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 27-8-
2025 by a learned co-ordinate bench. The learned counsel thus
based on parity seeks anticipatory bail.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court
in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 315 of 2024 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73263 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.