Patna High Court
Gajendra PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners subject to the conditions imposed by the Court.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of villagers from Parsauni, were implicated in a FIR (Case No. 406 of 2024) alleging that they formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the informant’s relatives, causing injuries and theft of a gold chain during a land dispute. They argued that they were innocent, the FIR was lodged three days after the alleged incident, and the allegations against them were vague and inconsistent with the injury reports. The State opposed their anticipatory bail application. The High Court, after considering the delay in filing the FIR, the nature of the alleged injuries, and the petitioners’ claim of innocence, decided to grant anticipatory bail. The bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, appearance before the trial court, non‑interference with witnesses or evidence, and refraining from further offences. The order was issued under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the nature of the alleged injuries justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 117, 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 324(2)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- assault
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 438
- Section 482
- FIR delay
- injury report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20651 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-406 Year-2024 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Gajendra Prasad S/o Ranglal Prasad Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
2. Rajeshwar Prasad S/o Late Harilal Prasad @ Late Harilal Sah Resident of
Village- Parsauni, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
3. Jhunjhun Mishra @ Jaykant Mishra @ Jayant Kumar @ Jayant Kumar
Mishra S/o Umashankar Mishra Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
4. Sunil Kumar Mishra @ Sunil Mishra S/o Yogendra Mishra Resident of
Village- Parsauni, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
5. Ambika Sah @ Amerika Sah S/o Late Harilal Sah Resident of Village-
Parsauni, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
6. Munnilal Sah @ Motilal Sah S/o Late Butai Sah Resident of Village-
Parsauni, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
7. Nagendra Prasad S/o Ranglal Prasad Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Paharpur, District- East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rina Sinha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 19-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through
virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 406 of 2024, dated
02.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2)/ 191(3)/ 190/ 126(2)/ 115(2)/ 117/ 109/ 324(2)/
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20651 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
2/5
303(2) of BNS 2023.
3. As per the FIR, in the year 2023, the informant
Bacchi Devi registered a sale deed bearing Khata no. 143, Plot
no. 656, area 4 katha in the name of his brother-in-law
Parmeshwar Prasad and husband Ramnaresh Prasad from
Devraj Paswan and the above land was recorded in name of
Devraj Paswan's maternal great-grand-father in the land records
(Khatiyan). After the land was registered, the informant took
possession of it and sowed maize, jowar and dhaicha in it. On
30.08.2024 at 2.00 pm with the intention of illegally occupying
this same land without any documentary basis accused. It is
alleged that Gajendra Prasad, Ranglal Prasad, Nitesh Sah,
Rajeshwar Prasad, Rintu Mishra,. Jhunjhun Mishra, Sunil Misra,
Rajan Mishra,Raju Mishra, Vinod Mishra, Nagendra Prasad,
Devchandra Prasad, Chandan Prasad, America Sah, Munnilal
Sah formed unlawful assembly and came to informant's land
and started cutting and uprooting the jowar, maize and dhaicha
crops. When her husband and brother-in-law arrived to stop the
above-mentioned persons then Gajendra Prasad took out farsa
and assaulted her brother-in-law on the left side of head causing
a serious injury. Her brother-in-law fell down and bleeding was
started thereafter Rajeshwar Prasad assaulted him severely with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20651 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
3/5
an axe and injured him. When her husband reached to save him
then Rintu Mishra assaulted his husband with farsa on his head
with intention to kill him too and he severely injured and
Jhunjhun Mishra, Nagendra Prasad, Ranglal Prasad assaulted
her husband in his back, ribs, waist, legs with sticks in the
meanwhile, a gold chain worth Rs. 45,000/- was forcibly
removed from her brother-in-law's neck and thereafter injured
were taken to Referral Hospital Areraj for treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offfence and
have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel for the
petitioners submits that the incident is said to have taken place
on 30.08.2024 whereas the FIR was lodged on 02.09.2024 with
a delay of three days and there is no explanation of the same. It
is next submitted that the allegation is that the petitioner,
namely, Gajendra Prasad and petitioner, namely, Rajeshwar
Prasad have caused injury to one Parmeshwar Prasad. The
nature of injury of the injured, namely, Parmeshwar Prasad is
simple whereas in respect of petitioner no. 3 and 7, it is
submitted that the allegation of causing injuries to the
informant’s husband, namely, Ram Naresh Prasad is made in the
FIR and the injury report which has been annexed to this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20651 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
4/5
petition and as per the allegation, the injury no. 1 is caused on
the forehead, is relatable to co-accused Rintu Mishra while in
the case of these petitioners, the injury which is referred as
injury no. 3 is related to petitioner nos. 3 and 7. The allegation is
found to be simple in nature and with regard to other accused
persons, the allegations are general and omnibus.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of this case as discussed above, this Court is inclined to grant
the privilege of anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned ACJM-IX, East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 406 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20651 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
5/5
member/relative/known of the petitioners who shall provide
official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of
his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
Abhishek/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.