Umesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19779 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-325 Year-2025 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka
                 ======================================================
                 Umesh Yadav Son of Safendar Yadav @ Sakendar Yadav Resident of Village-
                 Velay, P.S.- Dhoraiya, District- Banka

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   29-06-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No.325 of 2025, registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 115 (2), 126(2),

                   109(2), 117(2), 351 and 352 of the B.N.S., 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that on 15.11.2025 at 7 P.M. Umesh (petitioner) and

                   Kumud were plying their tractor in front of his house, on

                   objection that they should not ply the tractor as his cow was

                   sitting, on which, they abused and assaulted, further on alarm,

                   nine named accused persons came and Kumud assaulted by lathi

                   causing injury over left eye of the informant, thereafter Umesh
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19779 of 2026(4) dt.29-06-2026
                                            2/3




          (petitioner) assaulted his mother by lathi causing injury on head

          and Safindar assaulted by lathi causing injury on hand and

          Saurav assaulted his father by brick causing injury on head.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that on account of trivial dispute

          of plying tractor the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It

          is further submitted that since informant objected plying of

          tractor, as such an altercation took place, in which both side

          assaulted each other. It is also submitted that even presuming

          what has been alleged is true without admitting then petitioner is

          not alleged to have repeated the blow. It is further submitted that

          from side of the petitioner, Dhoraiya P.S. Case No.326 of 2025

          dated 28.11.2025 has been instituted against the informant and

          his side.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is

          alleged to have assaulted the mother of the informant by lathi

          causing injury on head and the injury has been opined to be

          grievous in nature and head is a vital part of the body. It is also

          submitted that since an FIR has been instituted from the side of

          the petitioner though subsequent to the instant FIR but then that
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19779 of 2026(4) dt.29-06-2026
                                                         3/3




                       amply demonstrates that an altercation had taken place in which

                       mother of the informant was assaulted leading to grievous

                       injury.

                                    6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                       counsel for the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the

                       privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                                    7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is

                       rejected.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T