Patna High Court
Ranjit RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application conditionally under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjit Rai, applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case involving offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 37(b)(c) of the Excise Act. He alleged that the informant, his aunt, fabricated the complaint due to a property dispute and that the actual assault was carried out by an intoxicated Sujeet Singh, who is his brother. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent, while the State opposed the bail. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed verification of his criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious charges under the IPC and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner has a clean criminal antecedent warranting bail.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner are false and stem from a property dispute.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 37(b), 37(c)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 354, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- IPC offences
- false implication
- property dispute
- bail conditions
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84116 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-547 Year-2022 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================
Ranjit Rai, Son of Rudal Rai Village- Beapur, Po- Beapur, P.S.- Maner,
District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narsingh Tanti
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 341, 323, 307, 354, 504, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. and
Sections 37(b)(c) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 07.08.2022 at around 11.30 P.M.,
Sujeet Singh along with petitioner started abusing her in an
intoxicated condition and when she objected they started
assaulting her with sticks, bricks and stones causing injury.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84116 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
informant. It is next submitted that informant is own aunt of the
petitioner and is having dispute relating to property. It is further
submitted that Sujeet was apprehended who was found in an
intoxicated condition and the informant took the same as an
opportunity to implicate the petitioner in the instant case as both
are brothers.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court
where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with
Maner P. S. Case No.547 of 2022, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84116 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…