Patna High Court
Pundev Sahani @ Punit SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Pundev Sahani applied for bail in a case (PS No. 163 of 2025) involving multiple offences under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that he, armed, assaulted an informant with a farsa, causing a head injury, while the petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated and that the injury was caused by a hard blunt object, asserting a mutual fight over a land dispute with injuries on both sides. He had been in judicial custody since 17 December 2025. The State opposed bail citing two prior criminal cases. After hearing both sides, the court found the inconsistencies in the evidence and the petitioner’s claim of innocence sufficient to merit bail, and ordered his release on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the charges and alleged assault.
- Whether the inconsistencies between the FIR allegation and medical opinion undermine the prosecution's case.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)(a), 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- Arms Act
- evidence inconsistency
- land dispute
- prior criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20763 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2025 Thana- PHENHARA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Pundev Sahani @ Punit Sahani S/o- Late Basu Sahani Resident of village-
Chakarpeta P.S.- Fenhara, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Phenhara P.S. Case No. 163 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2),
117(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and
Sections 25(1-b)(a) & 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner, along with others being armed with weapons, arrived
and started abusing. There is an allegation against the petitioner
that he assaulted the informant with farsa on the head of the
informant, due to which he received bleeding head injury.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20763 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. He also submits that there is also a counter version of this
case and in that case, the petitioner’s side has also received
injuries. From perusal of the order of the learned trial court, it
will transpire that regarding injury of the informant, the learned
trial court has recorded that the informant has received the
following injuries:
(i) lacerated wound, 6x2x1 cm, on the right parietal
area of the head.
(ii) Pain and swelling in the right parietal area of the
head.
(iii) Bodyache, caused by 1, 2, or 3 substances. Hard
and blunt substance.
Nature of injury no. 1 opinion reserved. Injury nos. 2 and
3 are simple in nature.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that there is an allegation
that the petitioner was assaulted with farsa, whereas the doctor
conducting the medical examination of the informant has opined
that the injury was caused by a hard and blunt substance. It has
been submitted that the injury and the allegation do not
correlate. He further submits that there was a free fight between
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20763 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
the parties due to the land dispute and both sides have received
injuries. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 17.12.2025.
6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of two cases.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in connection
with Phenhara P.S. Case No. 163 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…