Awadhesh PrajapativersusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88958 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- CHUTIA SAHAYAK District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Awadhesh Prajapati, Son of Nathuni Prajapati, Resident of village - Tiura,
                 Police Station- Chutiya,District- Rohtas.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Informant       :       Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Mr. Anish Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-01-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Chutiya P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 191(3), 117(2), 118(2), 109(1), 76,

                   352 and 351(2) of B.N.S.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner along with others arrived with an intention to kill and

                   it is alleged that the petitioner assaulted with Tangi on the head

                   of Shyam Sundar Prajapati due to which he received bleeding

                   head injury. After that, he gave a Tangi blow on his hand due to

                   which he has cut injury on his hand. When the wife of Shyam

                   Sundar Prajapati came she was also assaulted with Tangi.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88958 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner and the

          informant are cousin brothers. There is land dispute between

          them and the occurrence has taken placed on spur of moment

          and from perusal of the injury report of Shyam Sundar Prajapati

          it will transpire that he has received following injuries:-

                       (i)Cut wound in right and left parietal region of head

          (ii) Pain and swelling left elbow, (iii) Cut wound in right elbow,

          (iv) X-Ray report: Fracture shaft of radius and ulna of left

          forearm, (v) C.T.-Scan of head-normal. The injury on hand is

          grievous in nature.

                       5. As far as the injury report of Sharda Devi is

          concerned, she has received following injuries:

                       (i) Cut wound in right leg and left wrist, (ii) Swelling

          parietal region of head, (iii) CT-scan report-normal regarding

          head and X-Ray of left hand shows fracture of fifth metacarpal.

          So this injury on hand is grievous in nature.

                       6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also

          submitted that both the injured have received grievous injury on

          their hand only. The injuries which have been received on them
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88958 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on other parts of the body are simple in nature. There was no

                       intention on the part of the petitioner to commit murder of the

                       victims of this case. Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent

                       and he is languishing in judicial custody since 30.08.2025.

                                    7. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned

                       counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the

                       application for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has

                       submitted that victims of this case have received grievous

                       injuries.

                                    8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                       inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                       petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                       bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                       Magistrate 1st Class, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Chutiya

                       P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025.


                                                           (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T