Patna High Court
Chunnu LohraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to all petitioners, directing their release upon furnishing the prescribed bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioners, members of the Lohra family, were named in an FIR (Barari PS Case No. 62 of 2026) for assaulting an informant in a land dispute, with alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bihar Non‑Special (BNS) Act. The petitioners contended that the FIR’s allegations were vague, that the injuries to the informant were minor, and that the firing charge against Vishal Lohra was disputed, asserting that the informant’s side had actually fired. They also claimed a prior case (Barari PS Case No. 61 of 2026) had been lodged by them, and that they have clean antecedents. The State opposed bail. Considering the factual submissions, the minor nature of injuries, and the disputed firing allegation, the court directed that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties each, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the nature of the alleged offences and the facts of the case
- Whether the allegations of firing and assault are sufficiently substantiated to deny bail
- Whether the court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 BNSS to grant bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Non‑Special (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bihar Non‑Special Act
- assault
- land dispute
- injury
- false case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36537 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2026 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar
======================================================
1. Chunnu Lohra Son of Late Dhanilal Lohra Resident of Village -Maharani
PS- Barari, Dist- katihar
2. Santosh Lohra Son of Chunnu Lohra Resident of Village -Maharani PS-
Barari, Dist- katihar
3. Vishal Lohra Son of Chunnu Lohra Resident of Village -Maharani PS-
Barari, Dist- katihar
4. Manoj Kumar Lohra son of late Dhanilal Lohra Resident of Village
-Maharani PS- Barari, Dist- katihar
5. Sonelal Lohra @ Sonu Kumr Lohra Son of Late Dhanilal Lohra @ Late
Dhaniram Lohra Resident of Village -Maharani PS- Barari, Dist- katihar
6. Mahendra Sah son of Late Feku Sah Resident of Village -Maharani PS-
Barari, Dist- katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bal Krishna Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending their arrest in connection with Barari P.S. Case No.
62 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per FIR, 16 named co-accused persons including
petitioners alleged to assault informant by using lathi, iron rod
etc., causing head and bodily injuries, where allegation of firing is
also available against petitioner no. 3 namely Vishal Lohra,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36537 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
alleged occurrence took place due to land dispute.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that upon facial perusal of FIR, it can be
safely gathered that allegation of physical assault is very much
general and omnibus against petitioner no(s). 4, 5 and 6. It is
alleged that petitioner no. 2 assaulted informant using iron rod
and petitioner no. 3 open fired, which could not hit him, rather it
hit unknown person, who was from the group of petitioner no. 3.
Explaining further, it is submitted that in actual during occurrence
firing was opened by informant side, which hit son of petitioner
no. 1 which was fired by Bibhash Kumar Saha and just to save
Bibhash Kumar the present false case was lodged, whereas
petitioner side already lodged a case prior to this occurrence with
aforesaid allegation, which has been registered as Barari P.S.
Case No. 61 of 2026 on the same very day. Explaining further, it
is submitted that injury upon informant as alleged to be caused
by petitioner no. 2 upon medical examination found simple in
nature. While concluding argument, it is submitted that above
named petitioners are men of clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as nature of injuries found simple and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36537 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
allegation of firing prima-facie appears disputed in terms of
Barari P.S. Case No. 61 of 2026, accordingly all above-named
petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of four weeks, are directed to be
released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Katihar/concerned Court,
where the case is pending in connection with Barari P.S. Case No.
62 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.