Anjali DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42067 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2026 Thana- MEDNI CHAUKI District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
           1.     Anjali Devi S/o Ashok Pasean Village- Khawa, P. S. - Mednichowki,
                  District- Lakhisarai.
           2.    Sunita Devi W/o Vinod Paswan R/o Khawa, P.S. - Medinichowki, Dist. -
                 Lakhisarai.
           3.     Sanjula Devi @ Sanju Devi W/o Shrawan Paswan R/o Khawa, P.S. -
                  Medinichowki, Dist. - Lakhisarai.
                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Meena Singh, Advocate
                 For the informant        :      Mr. Md. Irshad, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   01-07-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP

                   for the State and learned Counsel for the informant.

                                2. The petitioners who apprehend arrest in connection

                   with Medinichowki P.S. Case No. 38 of 2026 lodged on

                   24.02.2026, for the offences punishable under sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

                   Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. As per the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been lodged

                   against four named accused persons including the petitioners.

                   The allegation against the petitioners is that in the background

                   of erecting cement pillar for creation of boundary wall, the

                   dispute has been arisen among co-villagers, informant and the

                   petitioners, wherein scuffling took place between them and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42067 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/3




          people from both the sides got injured.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for

          the same date and place of occurrence, there is case and counter

          case from both the sides. A bare perusal of both the FIRs, itself

          suggest that the dispute has taken place in the background of

          erecting cement pillar for construction of boundary wall on a

          particular piece of land for which both the parties are claiming.

          Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the antecedent of

          the petitioners is not clean as against Petitioner No. 1 there are

          four cases and Petitioner No. 2 there is one case, against

          Petitioner No. 3 there are three cases and all the cases have been

          lodged by the informant’s side only. The dispute is long pending

          dispute. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that

          both the parties are co-villagers and the petitioners are ready to

          fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon them

          in the event of granting bail.

                       5. Learned Counsel for the informant vehemently

          opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific

          allegation of assault by the petitioners to the informant’s side

          due to which grievous injuries have been caused. He further

          submits that it is true that there is case and counter case between

          the parties for the same date and place of occurrence in the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42067 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                      3/3




                    background of land dispute.

                                 6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                    bail and submits that both parties are resident of the same

                    village and in the background of erecting cement pillar, the

                    dispute has taken place which resulted into injuries from both

                    sides and there is case and counter case between the parties.

                                 7. Considering the genesis of the dispute which is land

                    dispute, wherein, scuffling took place between the parties and

                    the people from both the sides have received injury, let the

                    above-named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of

                    their arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of

                    four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of ₹30,000/-

                    (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each, as mentioned in Section

                    2(1)(d) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to the

                    satisfaction of the learned Court of J.M-1st class, Lakhisarai, in

                    connection with the aforementioned case, subject to the

                    conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya

                    Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                                (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Manshi/Ashwini

U     T