Ganauri Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13942 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2024 Thana- Manikpur P.S District- Arwal ====================================================== Ganauri Ram Son of Late Shiv Dutt Ram Resident of Village- Ahmadpur Hurna Mathiya, P.S.- Manikpur, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kumar Mritunjay, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Manikpur P.S. Case No. 42 of 2024 for the offence registered under sections 147, 149, 323, 341, 325, 307, 354(A), 354(B), 379, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the accused persons named in the FIR came armed variously and after abuse, the assault. When her brother-in-law, Anuj Yadav came to rescue, the allegation is that Ganauri Ram gave iron rod blow on the head but as he tried to escape, his hands stand fractured. Further allegation is about assault and outraging of modesty on the daughter-in-law which is attributed to Pramod Kumar and another daughter-in-law attributed to Chandan Kumar. This led to the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13942 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is case and counter case, three dozen accused persons have been named which raises suspicion. The case of the petitioner is earlier to the present FIR and only to implicate everyone, the accusation has been made.
5. Learned APP on the other hand has taken this Court to the FIR to show that specific allegation is against Ghanauri Ram of hitting the informant's brother in law, Anuj Yadav and the fracture has also been found in the injury report that has come along with the case diary.
6. Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner, as recorded above, no relief can be extended.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T