Patna High Court
Akhilesh RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court rejected the petitioners' application for anticipatory bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Akhilesh Ram and Sarita Devi, applied for anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR alleging they assaulted an informant and his family, causing injuries. The FIR specifically charges them under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., with some injuries classified as grievous. The petitioners contended they are innocent, the allegations are vague, and they have clean antecedents. The State argued that the accusations are specific and the injuries serious, warranting denial of bail. The court considered the direct nature of the accusations and the severity of the injuries and held that anticipatory bail could not be granted. Accordingly, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners despite specific accusations under the B.N.S. and the nature of injuries inflicted.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- grievous injury
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87627 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2025 Thana- DEV District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Akhilesh Ram Son of Jitan Ram @ Tejan Ram R/o Village - Keshwar Bigha,
Kataiya, P.S. - Deo, Dist. - Aurangabad, Bihar.
2. Sarita Devi Wife of Akhilesh Ram R/o Village - Keshwar Bigha, Kataiya,
P.S. - Deo, Dist. - Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Madhuresh Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 117(2), 109, 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the
F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,
assaulted informant and his family members due to which they
sustained injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. Allegation of assault is general and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87627 of 2025(3) dt.02-02-2026
2/2
omnibus and no specific accusation of overt act has been alleged
against these petitioners. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the
F.I.R. with specific accusation that they, along with other named
accused persons, assaulted informant and his family members as
a result of which, three persons sustained injuries. Doctor has
found some of the injuries sustained by the injured grievous in
nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and nature of
injuries sustained by the injured, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…