Patna High Court

Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner as the allegations were general and did not involve a specific serious offence against him.

Summary

Raushan Kumar was named in an FIR for alleged assault and threat to a 19‑year‑old informant in a case where the co‑accused was accused of rape. The petitioner argued that the allegations against him were vague, that he had a clean antecedent, and that the serious rape charge did not pertain to him. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner was involved in the alleged threat. The Court examined the FIR and found that the charge against the petitioner was limited to a general threat and not the substantive rape offence. Relying on Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita 2023, the Court held that bail could be granted. Accordingly, the petitioner was released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the usual conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the FIR alleging assault and threat in connection with a rape case
Whether the allegations against the petitioner are sufficiently specific to deny bail

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
threat
assault
false FIR
Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita
Section 482
Mahila Police Station case

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91445 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Raushan Kumar Son of Daya Nand Yadav Resident of Village- Hanuman
                 Nagar, P.S.- Baheri, Dist.- Darbhanga, wrongly mentioned in the FIR as
                 Village- Trimuhani, P.S.- Baheri, District- Darbhanga
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Baidyanath Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 92 of 2025 registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 74, 351(2),

                   115(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita 2023.

                                3. As per FIR, the informant who is aged about 19

                   years was in relationship with co-accused Santosh Kumar

                   Yadav since last two years prior to lodging the FIR, where this

                   petitioner alleged to advanced threat.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that co-accused Santosh Kumar Yadav

                   alleged to commit rape upon the informant whereas the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91445 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026
                                            2/3




          allegation against this petitioner is to assault and abuse the

          informant after the occurrence. It is submitted that the

          maximum allegation against this petitioner is available that he

          alongwith co-accused Gautam Kumar advanced threat and

          asked to informant to talk something while she was going

          ahead Shankar Rohar Chowk. It is pointed out that with main

          accused Santosh Kumar the informant was in affairs since last

          two years prior to lodging FIR. Petitioner claimed clean

          antecedent.

                       5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.

                       6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of fact as the allegation of rape is not available

          against the petitioner rather he alleged with very general and

          omnibus allegation as to advance threat to informant,

          accordingly, above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest

          or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a period of

          four weeks of the order, is directed to be released on bail

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          the learned S.D.J.M., Darbhanga/concerned Court, where the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91445 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     case is pending in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 92 of

                     2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                     482(2) of the BNSS.


                                                                   (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…