Patna High Court
Rohit Chaudhary @ Rohit Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, under Section 438 CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohit Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a Bodh Gaya police case (No.656/2025) that alleged his involvement in assaulting an informant with a pistol and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, assaulted the informant and stole a gold chain, invoking sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 352, 351(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended that the allegations were vague, that no specific overt act was ascribed to him, and that the case was a retaliatory filing; he also argued that the facts did not constitute an offence under Section 109 of the B.N.S. The State opposed the bail. After considering the submissions, the court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions, including personal appearance, cooperation with investigation, and possible cancellation for future similar offences. The order was made clear that its observations would not affect the trial. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner constitute an offence under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of specific overt act justify the grant of bail.
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(1), 352, 74
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8297 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-656 Year-2025 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Rohit Chaudhary @ Rohit Kumar Chaudhary S/o Ishwar Chaudhary Resident
of Village- Kharia, Police Staiton- Bodh Gaya, Distict- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamal Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 656/2025 registered
for the offence(s) under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2), 74, 352,
351(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
(B.N.S.).
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the named
accused persons are said to have abused and, thereafter,
assaulted the informant and others.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the allegation against the petitioner is that he took out his pistol
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8297 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/4
and assaulted on the head of the informant causing injury to him
while the other co-accused person, namely, Roushan Chaudhary,
had snatched away the gold chain and the informant even
received fracture on his hand. It has been submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and there is no
specific allegation of overt act against him, however, it has been
stated that it is alleged that he had assaulted the informant with
the butt of the pistol, causing severe head injury to him, but no
reference with regard to the same has been made even in the
impugned order. It has also been submitted that the case is not
made out for the offence under Section 109 of the B.N.S. It has
been submitted that the allegations levelled against the
petitioner are general and omnibus in nature and, in fact, the
present case was lodged as a counter blast to Bodh Gaya P.S.
Case No. 655 of 2025, lodged by the petitioner’s side. It has
lastly been submitted 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
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8297 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/4
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 bond 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 Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No.
656/2025, 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8297 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
4/4
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…