Patna High Court
Shankar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Shankar Chaudhary applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 352 of the BNS, 2023. He asserted that he has a clean antecedent and that the alleged assault on the informant’s son with a knife caused only simple injuries to both hands. The State opposed the bail, contending that the knife‑induced injuries demonstrated a repeated and serious assault. The Court considered the submissions and held that the allegations were sufficient to deny the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected and the case will continue in the lower court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the alleged assault with a knife causing injuries to the informant’s son.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- knife injury
- criminal procedure
- Bihar
- section 352
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17042 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-656 Year-2025 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda
======================================================
Shankar Chaudhary Son of Anandi Chaudhary Resident of village - Pesaur
(Pesuar), P.S.- Rahui, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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), 118(1), 109(1) and 352 of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that she came to know that an altercation took place
between her son and the petitioner on 29.11.2025 and petitioner
assaulted her son by knife causing injury on both hands.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
doubt, petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the son of the
informant by knife causing injury on both hands but then the
injury has been opined to be simple in nature.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17042 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/2
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that
specific allegation of assaulting the son of the informant by
knife is against the petitioner and since both hands of the son of
the informant were injured on account of assault by knife that
amply demonstrates that the blow was repeated.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with
Rahui P.S. Case No. 656 of 2025, G.R. No. 6792 of 2025
pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bihar
Sharif, Nalanda/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…