Patna High Court
Sunil Kumar Rai @ Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate and granted it subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunil Kumar Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several offences of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault, attempted murder and extortion. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted the informant, fired a weapon, and demanded protection money. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, arising from a family dispute, and that he has a clean antecedent. The court examined the merits of the bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Considering the circumstances, the court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions regarding sureties, personal appearance, and possible cancellation for future offences or concealment of antecedents. The order emphasized that its observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or committing further similar offences.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- extortion
- assault
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82139 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2025 Thana- JURAWANPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sunil Kumar Rai @ Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Ray, Son of Shivdayal Ray,
Resident of Village - Parharpur, P.S. - Jurwanpur, Dist. - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Aditya, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Jurawanpur P.S. Case No. 144 of 2025
registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 115(2), 118(2),
126(2), 109, 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that the named accused person, i.e., the petitioner,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82139 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
caught him and started assaulting him and thereafter the
petitioner is said to have fired on his left leg and another bullet
which was fired upon him, passed near his ear, however it did
not hit the informant and then the accused is said to have
threatened him to deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- as protection money.
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated
in this case and no such incident as stated has occurred. It has
been submitted that the petitioner and the informant are agnates
and the genealogy table has been detailed in paragraph 6 of the
application. It has further been submitted that the injury
sustained by the informant is found to be simple in nature
received on the non-vital part of the body. It has next been
submitted that there is a dispute between the two families and
only to settle personal scores, this false and concocted case has
been registered. It has been submitted that the demand of
protection money is all false and frivolous, especially for the
fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82139 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the
case is pending in connection with Jurawanpur P.S. Case No.
144 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read
with corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the
following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) If the petitioner, in future, is found to be
involved in similar nature of offence(s), the prosecution
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail
bond.
(v) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82139 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…