Patna High Court
Goutam Das @ Gautam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Goutam Das, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging assault with a sickle on the son of an informant. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner inflicted head injuries, citing specific sections of the B.N.S. and an injury report. The petitioner contended that the case was fabricated due to a prior land dispute and asserted his clean antecedents. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the specific accusation in the FIR and the seriousness of the offences. After considering the direct nature of the allegations and the gravity of the charges, the court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the specific allegations and gravity of the offences justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- assault
- false case
- land dispute
- injury report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82901 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2025 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
======================================================
Goutam Das @ Gautam Kumar S/o Ramjatan Das Resident of Village -
Sirajpur Harijan Tola, Ward No. 21, P.S - Parbatta, District - Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this
petitioner assaulted on head of son of informant by means of
sickle (hasua).
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, due to previous land
dispute, this false and concocted case has been lodged.
Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82901 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/2
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
with specific accusation that he assaulted son of informant with
sickle (hasua). The allegations levelled in the F.I.R. find support
from the injury report.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…