Patna High Court
Dileep Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court refused to grant bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Dileep Kumar Chaudhary and Deepak Prashant, were arrested in connection with a case alleging assault on the son of an informant and on persons who came to his rescue, under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. They contend that the charges are false, arising from a land dispute with the informant, who is a full brother, and assert that they have no prior criminal record. The State opposed their bail application, emphasizing the specific assault allegations. The court examined the facts, the seriousness of the alleged offenses, and the petitioners' claim of false implication. Concluding that the allegations of assault warranted continued custody, the court denied bail and dismissed the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for alleged assault offenses.
- Whether the claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2)
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- false implication
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2461 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1146 Year-2025 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Dileep Kumar Chaudhary Son of Late Bhagwanlal Chaudhary Resident of
Village- Magarhatta, P.S.- Town Hajipur, District- Vaishali
2. Deepak Prashant son of Dilip Kumar Chaudhary Resident of Village-
Magarhatta, P.S.- Town Hajipur, District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Town
Hajipur P.S. Case No. 1146 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 351(2), 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Prosecution story, in short, is that the accused
persons including the petitioner herein assaulted the son of the
informant due to which he sustained injuries. The persons came
in rescue were also assaulted by the accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2461 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
2/2
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that general and
omnibus allegation has been made against these petitioners.
Both the parties are gotiya as petitioner no. 1 and the informant
are full brother and there is a land dispute going on between
them. The allegation has been levelled against the petitioners
only with a view to grab their share in the ancestral property and
for which the present false case has been instituted. It has been
submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in
custody since 28.09.2025 and have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. Specific
allegation of assault is levelled against the petitioners. Hence,
the petitioner may not be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the specific allegation of assault against the
petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
petitioners is, hereby rejected.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Siddharth Soni/-
U T
Checking your session…