Akhilesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Kumar Prajapati v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5304 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Akhilesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Kumar Prajapati Son of Late Krishna Dayal Pandit (A. Card DOB 01-01-1997) Resident of Village - Mohabbat Chhapra, P.S. - Mehsi, District - East Champaran, Motihari 2.
Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Kumar Prajapati Son of Late Krishna Dayal Pandit (A. Card DOB 06-12-2006) Resident of Village - Mohabbat Chhapra, P.S. - Mehsi, District - East Champaran, Motihari 3.
Usha Devi Wife of Late Krishna Dayal Pandit (A. Card DOB 01-01-1981) Resident of Village - Mohabbat Chhapra, P.S. - Mehsi, District - East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Lal, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per prosecution case, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, these petitioners assaulted informant by means of lathi, danda as a result of which he sustained injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5304 of 2025(2) dt.19-02-2025 2/2 petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to village politics. He further submits that allegation of assault against petitioners is general and omnibus.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioners assaulted informant due to which he sustained grievous injury. Petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 have got one criminal antecedent and petitioner No. 3 has got two criminal antecedents.
6. Considering grievous injury and criminal antecedents, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T