Santosh Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1310 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-251 Year-2024 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Pandey, S/O Rameshwar Pandey, Resident of VillageMishrauliya Dah, P.S- Govindganj, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-02-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in F.I.R. and apprehending his arrest in connection with Govindganj P.S. Case No. 251 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 447, 341, 323, 325, 307,354(B),379,504,506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.The allegation against the petitioner is to assault the uncle of the informant during the course of occurrence by way of Farsa causing head injuries, where occurrence is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1310 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 2/3 alleged to be arising out of land dispute.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the present occurrence took place due to land dispute, where the both parties are agnates. It is pointed out that occurrence was of free fight in nature, where other persons also alleged to assault the uncle of the informant. It is pointed out that the nature of weapon as alleged to cause injury not appears corroborated with nature of injury as found by the doctor upon medical examination of injured because same is lacerated, which not appears possible by a sharp edged cut weapon like farsa, making the allegation false on its face. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner found involved in two more criminal cases, where he is on bail
5. Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel Mr. Jitendra Kumar appearing on behalf of the informant, while opposing the prayer of anticipatory bail submitted that this petitioner including co-accused persons repeatedly assaulted the uncle of the informant, causing seven injuries. It is pointed out that the allegation against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1310 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 3/3 this petitioner is specific as to cause grievous head injury to the uncle of the informant during the occurrence, which is sufficient to gather that petitioner was under intention to cause death. It is also pointed out that petitioner is a man of criminal antecedents and he found involved in two more criminal cases of similar nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and by taking note of fact as allegation against this petitioner is specific to assault on the head of uncle of the informant, causing grievous injury, accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T