Patna High Court
Ramesh ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Thakur, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an FIR alleging multiple offences under the BNS, based on the informant's claim that he participated in an assault on 06-09-2025. The petitioner argued he has a clean antecedent and that the FIR’s allegations are vague, with the injury described as simple and the informant’s statements inconsistent. The State opposed the bail, contending that the informant specifically identified the petitioner as the assailant. The Court examined the credibility of the informant’s statements, the nature of the alleged injury, and the petitioner’s clean record, finding insufficient basis to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, requiring a bail bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. given the allegations in the FIR
- Whether the informant's statements sufficiently establish the petitioner’s involvement in the alleged offences
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- FIR
- clean antecedent
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85619 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2025 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
Ramesh Thakur Son of Late Ramchandra Thakur Resident of Village -Kharua
Police Station- Sadar District -Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 329(4), 303(2), 351, 74 and 352 of the
BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that six named accused persons including the petitioner
came on 06.09.2025, at 08:00 p.m., and assaulted him by fighter
causing injury on his head and eye and also assaulted the
brother and nephew of the informant and acted inappropriately
with women member and snatched the chain.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85619 of 2025(2) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant i.e. Sonu Kumar. It is further
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that he was
assaulted by the accused persons but then the allegation of
assault is not specific. It is next submitted that even the injury
suffered by the injured has been opined to the simple in nature.
It is also submitted that petitioner is not a criminal.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant submits that informant in his re-
statement before the police has specifically stated that it was this
petitioner who assaulted him causing injury on head but then
fairly submits that the injury has been opined to be simple in
nature on which learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that informant by way of afterthought
subsequently took the name of the petitioner alleging that it was
petitioner who assaulted when in the FIR the allegation of
assault is general and omnibus in nature.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85619 of 2025(2) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) 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 Darbhanga Sadar
P.S. Case No. 290 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…