Patna High Court
Ranjeet Kumar Ray @ Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjit Ray @ Ranjeet Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar Ray, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the BNS, 2023, including offences such as extortion and assault. He claimed he was falsely implicated, arguing that the FIR only specifically named other accused (Mukesh and Ashok) for extortion, while his alleged involvement was vague. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s antecedent of seven serious criminal cases and the risk of him absconding if released. The court considered the State’s submissions and the petitioner’s criminal history. Concluding that the risk outweighed the grounds for bail, the court denied the anticipatory bail application. The application was therefore rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given his criminal antecedents and the nature of the allegations under the BNS, 2023.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 308(4), 324(4), 329(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- extortion
- false implication
- BNS 2023
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86175 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-469 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar Ray @ Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjit Ray @ Ranjeet Kumar Yadav
Son of Jay Nath Ray @ Jay Nath yadav Resident of village -Panapur Nav-
Diary, PS-Akilpur, District-Saran at present resident of Govt. School Gali,
PS- Digha, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 308(4), 324(4), 329(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of seven cases and the informant
alleges that he was inspecting the filling of road to Plot No. 785,
Khata No. 1428, Area 93 decimal belonging to Amrendradhari
Singh, further in the afternoon on 19.06.2025, the accused
persons including the petitioner came and threatened to stop the
work or else would be killed, further Mukesh and Ashok asked
the informant how is he carrying the work without paying
extortion.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86175 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/2
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 from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of demanding extortion is against Mukesh and Ashok
and as far as petitioner is concerned, the allegation against him
is general and omnibus in nature.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner has
antecedent of seven serious cases and in the event if the
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may
abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State and also taking into consideration the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to extend
the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…