Patna High Court
Rishav Raj @ Rishav KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the petitioner’s prior criminal record and the serious nature of the alleged offences justified denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rishav Raj, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving alleged assault on a lady police officer during a police operation. He claimed the allegations were exaggerated, that he only intervened to protect his family, and that the injury to the informant was minor. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges under multiple sections of the B.N.S., 2023 and the petitioner’s antecedent of three prior cases. The court considered the seriousness of the offences, the lack of documentary evidence supporting the petitioner’s version, and his prior criminal record. Concluding that the allegations were serious and the petitioner was not a first‑time offender, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail. The application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the applicable provisions given the nature and seriousness of the offences alleged
- Whether the petitioner’s antecedent criminal record precludes the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the alleged assault on a police officer constitutes a serious offence warranting denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 115(2), 121(1), 121(2), 126(2), 132, 190, 191(2), 223, 351(2), 352, 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- assault on police officer
- antecedent criminal record
- bail denial
- B.N.S. 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85748 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2025 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Rishav Raj @ Rishav Kumar S/o- Manoj Prasad @ Manoj Kumar Mohalla -
Chaklokman Gudari Bazar Gola Patti ward no. 12, P. S. - Dalsingsarai Dist. -
Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.305/2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2),
132, 223, 121(2), 121(1), 74, 352, 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant
alleges that she along with police force had come to Gudri
Bazar in connection with investigation of Dalsingsarai P.S. Case
No.291/2025, when Manoj along with his family members
started misbehaving with the police and the petitioner along
with Manoj caught the informant and torn her dress and even
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85748 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
scratched her with nails and the petitioner tried to snatch her
pistol, on arrival of more force, some accused were apprehended
while petitioner along with some other accused fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that even presuming what has
been alleged is true without admitting then informant suffered
simple injury. It is next submitted that petitioner was returning
from his coaching when he saw force at his house misbehaving
with his family members, as such he dissuaded the informant
and the force from entering his house and thus an altercation
took place in between both the sides. It is next submitted that
allegation of tearing clothes and nailing the informant is
exaggerated.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that
though it has been submitted that petitioner was coming from
coaching and is a student but then no documentary evidence on
record to substantiate the said submission. It is further submitted
that informant is a lady police officer and she specifically
alleges that petitioner tore her clothes and nailed her and even
tried to snatch her pistol. It is next submitted that investigation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85748 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
in the case is continuing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP and taking into consideration that petitioner has antecedent
of three cases, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…