Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prince GiriversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied.

Summary

Petitioner Prince Giri applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for offences including assault, criminal intimidation and attempt to cause grievous hurt. The prosecution alleges that Giri, while intoxicated, tried to cut down a tree on the informant's property, used a grinder cutter, and injured the informant's thigh. Giri contends the tree was on his own land and that the incident was a scuffle, not as alleged. The State opposed bail, highlighting two prior criminal antecedents, one being an alleged murder under IPC s.302. The High Court, noting the seriousness of the charges and the petitioner’s criminal record, rejected the anticipatory bail application but directed that if Giri surrenders within four weeks and files a regular bail petition, the matter be considered promptly.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in view of the nature of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents, including an alleged murder, preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • criminal antecedent
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Indian Penal Code
  • assault
  • grievous hurt
  • bail procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15387 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- BELSAND District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Prince Giri S/O Chitranjan Giri Resident of Ward No. 14, Near Bazar, P.O-
                 Bhandari, P.S- Belsand, Distt.- Sitamarhi, Bihar- 843316.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Vikas Ratan Bharti, Advocate
                                          :        Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
                                          :        Mr. Kumar Abhishek, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-03-2026                     Heard the parties.

                                  2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   connection with Belsand P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025 registered

                   for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 329(3), 118,

                   352, 351(2), 109(1) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

                   lodged on 17.10.2025 by the informant Amarjeet Sah.

                                  3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that the petitioner who was intoxicated came to the door of the

                   informant and forcibly tried to cut down the Semar Tree planted

                   near his door, as the informant objected, he turned the Glander

                   Cutter Machine towards him which actually hit his thigh and got

                   injured. As the informant ran for his life, allegation is that the

                   petitioner followed him with the machine. Subsequently, the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15387 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      informant was taken to the hospital which followed the F.I.R..

                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                      tree is in his own land, he wanted to get it cut, the informant

                      objected and a scuffle took place, nothing short of the allegation

                      made actually happened.

                                   5. Learned APP opposes the prayer and has taken this

                      Court to paragraph no.3 to show that the petitioner has two

                      criminal antecedent which include and allegation under section

                      302 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                   6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also

                      the observation of the learned Sessions Judge couple with the

                      fact that this petitioner has criminal antecedent, no relief can be

                      extended, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

                                   7. However, if the petitioner surrenders within a

                      period of four weeks, files bail application, the court concerned

                      shall consider the matter and dispose it of preferably on the

                      same day.



                                                     (Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.