In Jhuna Dubey @ Ratnakar Dwivedi @ Jhunu Dubey vs. The State of Bihar (2026), Supreme Court’s Division Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma passed a 5-page long order dated January 28, 2026, wherein, it set aside the 4-page long order dated August 20, 2025 by Justice Harish Kumar of Patna High Court which had rejected the appellant’s prayer for bail in anticipation of arrest. The appellant figures as an accused in FIR dated September 17, 2024 registered with Police Station Kundwa Chainpur, Motihari. It was alleged in the FIR that the appellant committed offences punishable under Section(s) 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2), 324(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Justice Datta observed:"....the State is silent as to whether the appellant was called upon to join investigation in terms of the notice issuing order dated 8th December, 2025, we are of the view that the appeal should be accepted."
Supreme Court directed that "in the event of the appellant being arrested in connection with proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR, he shall be released on bail by the arresting/investigating officer/trial court on terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court. 8. It is made clear that in the event the appellant breaches any of the terms and conditions imposed by it, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant. 9. Needless to observe, the appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, by making inducement, threat or promise, dissuade any person acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to any police officer or to the court. 10. Also, since the investigation is yet to conclude, we direct that if the investigating officer calls upon the appellant to join the investigation, he shall do so by attending the police station. 11. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case."
In Jhuna Dubey @ Ratnakar Dwivedi @ Jhunu Dubey vs. The State of Bihar (2025), Justice Kumar had heard the criminal miscellaneous petition of 1. Jhuna Dubey @ Ratnakar Dwivedi @ Jhunu Dubey, 2. Guddu Dubey @ Pushpakar Dwivedi, 3. Shravan Kumar @ Shravan Kumar Dubey and 4. Gopal Dubey who had approached the High Court apprehending their arrest in connection with Kundwa Chain Pur P.S. Case No. 138 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2), 324(2), 352, 351(2) of the BNS, 2023. On the date of the alleged incident, all the accused persons named in the FIR, including the petitioners armed with various weapons had surrounded the informant and her husband over pending land dispute and started abusing and assaulting them. On objection raised by the informant and her husband, petitioner no.2 caught hold the hair of the informant; whereupon petitioner no.1 assaulted her by means of knife. It was further alleged that when the husband of the informant tried to pacify the matter, thereupon petitioner no.4 and co-accused Ashok Dubey also assaulted him by means of iron rod over his head due to which he sustained serious injury.
The petitioners' counsel had submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it appeared that there was a long-standing dispute between the parties and, in fact, on account of such reason, both the parties were entered into a free fight. So far as petitioners no.2, 3 and 4 are concerned, the omnibus nature of allegation and the injury sustained by the husband of the informant, was found to be simple in nature.
Justice Kumar concluded: "7. Having considered the submissions set forth by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the allegation as well as the injury report, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners no.2, 3 and 4 on pre-arrest bail. They are directed to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.1st Class, Sikrahana at Dhaka, East Champaran, Motihari....8. So far petitioner no.1 is concerned, taking note of the specific allegation and his criminal antecedent, his prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail stands rejected. 9. In case, petitioner no.1 surrenders before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit(s) without being prejudiced in any manner by the present order."
No comments:
Post a Comment