Patna High Court
Ranjit Rawat @ Ranjit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that, given the lack of injury and precedent of similar bail orders, anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is warranted.
Summary
The petitioners, Ranjit Rawat and Ravi Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Jamui P.S. Case No. 794 of 2024) filed under Sections 125(a), 351(2), 351(3), 191(2), 190 of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged that they pelted bricks and discharged a firearm, though no one was injured. The petitioners argued that the case was filed due to their prior criminal antecedents, while the State opposed bail on the same ground. The Court noted that similar accused had been granted bail in Dharmendra Rawat & another vs State of Bihar and observed the absence of any injury. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., imposing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions regarding appearance, cooperation, and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 125(a), 190, 191(2), 351(2), 351(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- Arms Act
- brick pelting
- no injury
- bail conditions
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75021 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-794 Year-2024 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Ranjit Rawat @ Ranjit Kumar S/O Parmeshwar Rawat R/O Village- Lagma,
P.S- Jamui, Distt.- Jamui.
2. Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Rawat S/O Sudhir Rawat R/O Village- Lagma, P.S-
Jamui, Distt.- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .. ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Anisha Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard Ms. Anisha Sinha, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 794 of 2024 instituted
under Sections 125(a), 351(2), 351(3), 191(2) and 190 of the
Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 and 27 of the Arms Act lodged on
08.02.2024 by the informant, Sulekha Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that firstly the accused started pelting bricks and later opened
fire though no one was hit. This followed the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
there is case and counter case, the case of the petitioners being
the earlier one, only because they have criminal antecedent,
roped in the present FIR. The last submission is that similar
situate others have been granted in Cr. Misc. No. 72911 of 2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75021 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
(Dharmendra Rawat and another vs. the State of Bihar) on
21.01.2026 by a coordinate bench.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
they have criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
parties as also that there is no injury nor anyone has been hit,
similar situate accused have been granted bail, 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
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 Jamui P.S. Case No.
794 of 2024 to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Jamui 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75021 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
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
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…