Patna High Court
Hari Shankar Sah @ Hari Shankar PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted where injuries are simple but denied where serious injuries to vital parts are alleged.
Summary
The petitioners filed an application for anticipatory bail in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to assault and related offences. The prosecution alleged that the accused, who were agnates involved in a land dispute, had attacked the informant's family with weapons, causing injuries of varying severity. The petitioners argued that they were falsely implicated and that the injuries were either simple or unproved. The court examined the nature of the injuries, noting that petitioners 3 and 4 were alleged to have caused serious injuries to vital parts of the victims, whereas petitioners 1, 2 and 5 were linked only to simple injuries. Accordingly, the court denied anticipatory bail to petitioners 3 and 4 but granted it to petitioners 1, 2 and 5, subject to bail bond conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused persons in view of the nature and seriousness of the injuries alleged.
- Whether the severity of injuries to vital parts justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita permits the court to conditionally grant anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 125(a), 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 352, 76
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- injury severity
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4453 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-301 Year-2025 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Hari Shankar Sah @ Hari Shankar Prasad S/o Banarsi Sah @ Anarsi Prasad
R/o village- Sundarpatti, PS- Pakaridyal, Dist- East Champaran
2. Rajeshwar Sah S/o Banarsi Sah @ Anarsi Prasad R/o village- Sundarpatti,
PS- Pakaridyal, Dist- East Champaran
3. Ramashankar Sah @ Ramashankar Prasad S/o Banarsi Sah @ Anarsi Prasad
R/o village- Sundarpatti, PS- Pakaridyal, Dist- East Champaran
4. Ramji Sah S/o Banarsi Sah @ Anarsi Prasad R/o village- Sundarpatti, PS-
Pakaridyal, Dist- East Champaran
5. Suraj Sah @ Suraj Kumar S/o Ramashankar Sah @ Ramashankar Prasad
R/o village- Sundarpatti, PS- Pakaridyal, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr .Anil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-05-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail,
arises out of Pakaridayal Police Station Case No. 301 of 2025,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 118(2), 109, 125(a), 117(2)
and 76 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.06.2025
at about 11:00 a:m, dispute arose when petitioner no. 4 uprooted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4453 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
2/4
a peg and on protest being made by the informant, he abused
and threatened him. Thereafter, all the accused persons,
including the petitioners, allegedly came on the place of
occurrence by tractor along with other persons carrying
weapons and surrounded the house of the informant. The
allegation against the petitioners is that petitioner no. 4 and co-
accused Puja Devi allegedly sprinkled chilli powder due to
which informant’s family members unable to see. Petitioner no.
4 also assaulted Radhe Shyam Sah with an iron rod on his head
and both hands causing oozing head injury. Petitioner no. 3
inflicted lathi blow on the head of Lal Babu Sah, while
petitioner no. 5 inflicted rod blow on the right hand of Lal Babu
Sah, causing injury on his right hand and also assaulted on his
eyes. Co-accused Om Prakash Sah inflicted knife blow on father
of the informant due to which he sustained sharp cut injury on
his neck. Petitioner no. 2 caught hold hair of the informant’s
mother, namely, Fuljhari Devi and assaulted her with a brick on
her head. Petitioner no. 1 along with co-accused Rohit Kumar is
alleged to have assaulted with leg and fist on informant’s elder
sister in-law, namely, Guddy Devi, during which she was
subjected to physical assault and her clothes were disarranged.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4453 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
3/4
petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated due to
land dispute between the parties, who are agnates. The FIR has
been lodged after delay of about ten days and is a result of civil
and property dispute between the parties due to which civil case
vide Title Suit No. 305 of 2025 is pending between the parties in
which petitioners’ father is plaintiff and Phuljhari Devi who is
mother of the informant is defendant. Injury sustained by
Phuljhari Devi is simple in nature, whereas the medical opinion
regarding the other injured persons has been kept reserved.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and
submits that petitioner nos. 3 and 4 have assaulted Radhe
Shyam Sah, causing injury measuring 3” × 1” × ½” on his head.
Petitioner no. 4 assaulted Lal Babu Kumar, due to which he
sustained similar injury on his forehead, attributable to
petitioner nos. 3 and 4. Altogether seven persons have sustained
injuries in the occurrence.
6. Considering the nature of injuries caused on the
vital parts of the victims, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory
bail to petitioner nos. 3 and 4.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner nos. 3 and 4 is rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4453 of 2026(4) dt.05-05-2026
4/4
8. However, considering the nature of injuries
attributed to petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 5 are simple in nature, I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them.
9. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 5 is allowed.
10. Let the petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 5, above named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below
within four weeks, 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 learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate 8, Motihari, East Champaran, in connection
with Pakaridayal Police Station Case No. 301 of 2025, subject
to the condition laid down under Section 482 (2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.