Patna High Court
Vinod RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted, subject to conditions, despite the pending charges.
Summary
Vinod Ray sought pre‑arrest bail in connection with Turkauliya police case No. 142 of 2025, which alleged offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault with a sword. The incident arose from a land dispute where the petitioner’s son was accused of destroying a maize crop, leading the petitioner to allegedly assault the informant and strike the informant’s son with a sword. The petitioner’s counsel argued that there was no injury report for the informant’s son and that the injuries to other persons were minor, contending that the prosecution case lacked confidence. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged assault. The court, noting the absence of an injury report, the minor nature of other injuries, and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, granted bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and a condition that one bailor be a close family member, invoking Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the absence of an injury report for the alleged victim precludes the continuation of the prosecution and justifies bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita warrants denial of pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s antecedent and the nature of injuries sustained by other persons support the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352, 75(2), 76
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- assault with sword
- injury report
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 482(2)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73525 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Vinod Ray S/o Chhotelal Ray @ Chhotelal Yadav R/o Village- Chargaha,
P.S.- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Dhandev Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 142 of 2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109,
76, 75(2), 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. Allegedly in the morning of the fateful day while
the informant saw that the son of the petitioner alongwith others
were destroying the maize crop and when he made objection
and informed the same to the petitioner, the petitioner started
abusing and assaulting the informant. There is a specific
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73525 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
accusation against the petitioner of causing a sword blow over
the head of the son of the informant.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner taking this Court through the impugned order
submitted that the entire case falls to the ground for the simple
reason that there is no injury report of Sakir Aalam, son of the
informant on record and, as such, the entire prosecution case
does not inspire confidence. So far the injuries sustained to
other persons are concerned, all of them have been found to be
simple in nature. The genesis of the occurrence is nothing, but a
land dispute. Besides the aforesaid fact, there is a counter
version of the present case instituted by the petitioner being
Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 143 of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits
that it is the petitioner who had specifically assaulted the son of
the informant by means of sword.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the absence of the injury report of the son of the informant,
Sakir Aalam, besides the fact others have sustained simple
injury as well as the fair antecedent of the petitioner, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73525 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at
Motihari in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 142 of
2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of
the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further
condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family
members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U T
Checking your session…