Patna High Court
Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, four residents of Ajad Bigha village, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Barun Police Station Case No.491 of 2025, wherein they were accused under several sections of the BNS, 2023 for allegedly assaulting an informant with a lathi and iron rod. They contended that the FIR was false, filed to protect the informant from a counter‑case (SC/ST Case No.47 of 2025) and emphasized that both parties belong to the same village and have no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, pointing to medical evidence of head injuries recorded in the case diary of the Sessions Court. The High Court observed that the dispute was petty, the injuries had been acknowledged in the Sessions Court’s rejection order, and therefore declined to grant anticipatory bail. However, the Court directed the trial court to entertain a regular bail application if the petitioners surrender within four weeks, directing a merit‑based decision on the same day.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances of the FIR and alleged injuries
- Whether the existence of a counter‑case and the petitioners' clean record warrant relief
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- FIR
- assault
- injury evidence
- counter case
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5027 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2025 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Dharmendra Kumar S/o- Yogendra Paswan R/v- Ajad Bigha Ps- Jamhore
Dist- Auangabad
2. Suraj Kumar @ Nagendra Paswan @ Suraj S/o- Yogendra Paswan R/v- Ajad
Bigha Ps- Jamhore Dist- Auangabad
3. Sachin Kumar S/o- Sikandar Paswan R/v- Ajad Bigha Ps- Jamhore Dist-
Auangabad
4. Bhuneshwar Kumar @ Chhotu S/o- Balimitra Paswan R/v- Ajad Bigha Ps-
Jamhore Dist- Auangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukul Kumari, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and
Learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Barun P.S. Case No.491 of 2025, G.R. No.3220
of 2025, lodged on 28.10.2025, for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5)
of the BNS, 2023, pending before the Court of C.J.M.,
Aurangabad.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
four named accused persons including the petitioners with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5027 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
allegation that they have assaulted the informant by lathi and
iron rod (kanti) and also to his younger brother due to which he
became injured.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He
further submits that both parties are resident of same village and
they are well-known to each other. He submits that for the same
date and place of occurrence, there is case and counter-case
lodged from both the sides. The informant has lodged case i.e.,
Barun P.S. Case No.491 of 2025 (present case) and the
petitioners have lodged case i.e., SC/ST Case No.47 of 2025. He
further submits that the allegation made in the FIR, is out and
out false and the present case has been filed only with a view to
save his skin from SC/ST case.
5. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the
petitioners is clean and they are ready to fulfill all the conditions
whatsoever shall be imposed upon them.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail and submits that it is true that the specific allegation is not
there, but he has mentioned before the Court about the injury
observed by virtue of case diary by the Sessions Court by which
injury on the right side and left side of the head and specially on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5027 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
occipital region. In addition to that, three more injuries have
been found.
7. Upon hearing the parties, it transpires to this Court
that both are resident of same village and cause of dispute are
petty in nature and the injury alleged has been acknowledged in
the rejection order of the Sessions Court.
8. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners,
therefore the bail application of the petitioners is hereby
rejected.
9. However, trial court is directed to consider the
regular bail application of the petitioners, if they surrenders
within 4 weeks from today and prays for regular bail, then trial
court, upon going through the injury, shall pass order on merit
without being prejudice of the present order preferably on the
same day.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-
U T
Checking your session…