Madan Chaudhary @ Madan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25925 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-454 Year-2024 Thana- NARDIGANJ District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Madan Chaudhary @ Madan S/o- Mathura Chaudhary Resident Of VillageYadupur Bhadhour Ps- Nardiganj District- Nawada 2.
Vijay Chaudhary S/o- Parmeshwar Chaudhary Resident Of Village-Yadupur Bhadhour Ps- Nardiganj District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Nardiganj P.S. Case No. 454 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 74, 117(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 28.12.2024 by the informant Sharda Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant, the widow of the deceased alleged that Vijay Chaudhary firstly caught hold of her daughter, later dragged her husband outside where Madan Chaudhary, Mahendra Chaudhar and Rahul Kumar indiscriminately assaulted him. Vijay Chaudhary gave
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25925 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 iron rod blow on the informant, they tried to save him but in vain. The allegation of taking away the amount/ornament is/are also there. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier with regard to the death of the petitioner's son, F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2014 in which the husband/deceased was the accused. Further, in the year 2020 also another Nardiganj P.S. Case No. 192 of 2020 was lodged as a counter blast case implicating each and everyone.
5. Learned APP on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the husband of the informant was brutally attacked/assaulted, he got head injury and succumbed to death.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the perusal of the record and the observation of learned Sessions Judge, clearly, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T