Patna High Court
Jhigan Ray @ Jhingan RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners (excluding Pintu Kumar) with specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, members of the Ray family, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No. 324 of 2025 alleging offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that the accused, armed, attacked him, with Pintu Kumar accused of inflicting a grievous injury and others of causing simple injuries. The petitioners argued they have no criminal antecedent and that the main allegation is against Pintu Kumar, whose anticipatory bail was withdrawn. The State, through the informant, opposed bail for Pintu Kumar citing the grievous nature of the injury. The court, noting the withdrawal of Pintu Kumar's application, the lack of antecedent and the simple nature of injuries to the others, granted anticipatory bail to the remaining petitioners subject to strict conditions, and ordered bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners other than Pintu Kumar.
- Whether the nature of injuries (grievous vs simple) and absence of criminal antecedent justify anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions can be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(3), 352, 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- grievous injury
- simple injury
- bail conditions
- FIR
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8189 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Jhigan Ray @ Jhingan Rai S/O Late Manirkha Ray R/O Vill.- Mathiya
Bariyarpur, P.S.- Piprakothi, Dist.- East Champaran. 845429
2. Priya Kumari D/O Jhigan Ray @ Jhingan Rai R/O Vill.- Mathiya
Bariyarpur, P.S.- Piprakothi, Dist.- East Champaran. 845429
3. Pintu Kumar S/O Jhigan Ray @ Jhingan Rai R/O Vill.- Mathiya Bariyarpur,
P.S.- Piprakothi, Dist.- East Champaran. 845429
4. Priya Devi W/O Pintu Kumar R/O Vill.- Mathiya Bariyarpur, P.S.-
Piprakothi, Dist.- East Champaran. 845429
5. Mintu Kumar S/O Jhigan Ray @ Jhingan Rai R/O Vill.- Mathiya Bariyarpur,
P.S.- Piprakothi, Dist.- East Champaran. 845429
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mohd Rustam Hussain, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 22-04-2026 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners prays
for and is allowed to withdraw the anticipatory bail application
of petitioner no. 3, Pintu Kumar.
2. The anticipatory bail application of petitioner no. 3,
Pintu Kumar stands dismissed as withdrawn.
3. Heard Mr. Mohd. Rustam Hussain, learned counsel
for the petitioner, Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP and Mr.
Sumit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the informant.
4. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8189 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
connection with Piparkothi P.S. Case No. 324 of 2025 for the
offence under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2),
118(1), 109, 74, 303(2), 352 and 351(3) of the BNS lodged on
24.09.2025 by the informant, Kaushal Rai.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that when he was sitting near his door, the accused came armed
variously and allegation against Pintu Kumar is of attacking the
informant causing injury while Mantu Kumar gave knife blow
on the hand, the other accused including Dhigan Rai and Priya
Kumari assaulted on the arms and back with the iron rod. This
led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
main allegation is against Pintu Rai and the injury inflicted by
him has been found to be grievous in nature and the other
injuries have been found to be simple in nature. Further, none of
the petitioners have criminal antecedent and two of them are
ladies who have been dragged in the present FIR.
5. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the
prayer submitting that so far as Pintu Kumar is concerned, he
gave blow to the informant and the injury duly received by him,
has been found to be grievous in nature.
6. Considering the submission of the parties main
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8189 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
allegation is against Pintu Kumar whose anticipatory bail stands
dismissed as withdrawn, the others do not have criminal
antecedent, the injury inflicted has been found to be simple in
nature and they have undertaken to diligently appear in trial, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the
privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender 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 like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, East
Champaran, Motihari in connection with Piparkothi P.S. Case
No. 324 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document (Aadhaar Card/Voter ID Card/Pan Card/Driving
License) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) 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;
(iii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8189 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iv) 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;
(v) 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)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…