Laxman Chaudhary @ Laxman Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27580 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2024 Thana- INDRAPURI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Laxman Chaudhary @ Laxman Kumar Chaudhary S/o Dina Chaudhary Resident of Village- Karmanganj Katar Tola, P.S.- Indrapuri, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shashi Kant, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Indrapuri P.S. Case No. 42/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 19(2)/ 190/ 126 (2), 115 (2)/ 118(1)/ 74/ 329(4)/ 352/351(2) of the B.N.S.S.
3. As per prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant by means of iron rod as a result of which the informant sustained head injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner bears one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. He further submits that occurrence took place on 18.10.2024 and FIR has been lodged on 20.10.2024
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27580 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 after delay of two days, though, the police station is 06 k.m. from the place of occurrence which questions the authenticity of the FIR. He orally submits that all sections are bailable except Sections 74 and 118 (1) of B.N.S.S. which are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The injury sustained by the informant is simple in nature. In the light of aforesaid submission, no offence is made against the petitioner under the aforesaid sections.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is allegation against the petitioner who is said to have assaulted the informant by means of iron rod as a result of which he sustained head injury and the petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Dehri
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27580 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 (Rohtas) in connection with Indrapuri P.S. Case No. 42/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. Accordingly, the application stands allowed. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkumar/- U T