Patna High Court
Jainarayan PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate as the injuries are simple and the petitioners are not responsible for the grievous injuries alleged.
Summary
The petitioners, seven residents of Pantoka village, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an FIR alleging that fifteen persons, including them, assaulted the informant's family during a dispute over food served at a shradh ceremony. The petitioners argued that the FIR shows only petitioner No.2 caused a simple toe injury, while the more serious injuries were either caused by co‑accused or were part of a counter‑case where the petitioners themselves suffered injuries. The State opposed bail, contending that injuries had been inflicted. The court examined the nature of the injuries, the existence of a case and counter‑case between agnates, and concluded that the injuries were simple and the petitioners were not responsible for the grievous harm. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and conditions of cooperation under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482 B.N.S.S, 2023 in view of the alleged assault.
- Whether the nature of injuries (simple vs grievous) influences the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioners are liable for the injuries alleged in the FIR.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115, 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 74
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- simple injury
- grievous injury
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure
- Bihar
- FIR
- agnates
- food dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7466 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2025 Thana- Haraiya District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Jainarayan Prasad S/O Late Ramdev Prasad Resident of village- Pantoka
ward no 17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East Champaran
2. Keshav Kumar @ Kheshav Prasad Son of Late Raju Prasad @ Rajeev
Prasad Resident of village- Pantoka ward no 17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East
Champaran
3. Ashok Prasad Son of Paras Prasad Resident of village- Pantoka ward no 17
P.S.- Haraiya District- East Champaran
4. Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar Son of Paras Prasad Resident of village-
Pantoka ward no 17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East Champaran
5. Ravindra Prasad Son of Late Shivbachan Prasad @ Shivbachan Raut
Resident of village- Pantoka ward no 17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East
Champaran
6. Sharma Prasad Son of Devbachan Prasad Resident of village- Pantoka ward
no 17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East Champaran
7. Lalan Prasad Son of Rambachan Raut Resident of village- Pantoka ward no
17 P.S.- Haraiya District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, A.P.P
For the Informant : Mr. Bhagya Narayan Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandy, the learned A.P.P. for the State
and Mr. Bhagya Narayan Jha, the learned counsel appearing for the
informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered
under Sections 115, 118 (1), 126 (2), 74, 109 and 3(5) of B.N.S 2023.
3. The allegation in the First Information Report is that all
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7466 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
the accused persons, being fifteen in number, including the present
petitioners came variously armed and started assaulting the
informant’s family causing injuries to them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
bare perusal of the First Information Report itself would indicate that
the specific allegation of assaulting injured, Pramod Kumar, who is
said to have sustained injury on his head is upon co-accused Om
Prakash and so far as the assault upon informant’s cousin brother,
Ravi Prakash, is concerned, there is an allegation on petitioner no. 2.
However, the said injury sustained by Ravi Prakash happens to be on
the toe which is the non-vital party of the body and it is also a fact
that the injuries suffered by the injured persons are simple in nature.
Learned counsel has also submitted that as a matter of fact a case had
been instituted on the side of the petitioners also wherein there are
grievous injuries sustained by the wife of petitioner no. 1, petitioner
no. 3 and petitioner no. 5 sustained grievous injury while the
petitioner no. 1 also sustained simple injury and the F.I.R. on the
petitioners’ side (Annexure-2) also discloses that the entire dispute
had taken place on account of some dispute with regard to the quality
of food being served in shradh ceremony of the mother of the
petitioner no. 3 and both the parties are also agnates.
5. The learned A. P.P. for the State and the learned
counsel appearing for the informant, however, strongly oppose the
grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the injury has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7466 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
suffered by the injured persons.
6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and
also considering that there is a case and counter case between agnates
and the nature of injuries are also simple and the petitioners are not
responsible for the injuries of the injured but for causing one simple
injury to one of the injured by petitioner no.2, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of
four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with
Haraiya P.S. Case No. 135 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the
case is pending subject to the condition laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S, 2023, subject to the further following conditions:
(i) The petitioner will cooperate in the investigation and
trial and in case of any act of non-cooperation, the prosecution would
be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail bonds of
the petitioners.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…