Mukesh Kumar Sahu @ Mukesh Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27592 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2021 Thana- JHANJHARPUR District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Mukesh Kumar Sahu @ Mukesh Kumar Gupta S/O Laxman Sahu R/O Village- Chora Mahril, P.S- Jhajharpur, Distt.- Madhubani. 2.

Shiv Shankar Sahu S/O Late Rajendra Sahu R/O Village- Chora Mahril, P.SJhajharpur, Distt.- Madhubani. 3.

Shambhu Sahu S/O Late Rajendra Sahu R/O Village- Chora Mahril, P.SJhajharpur, Distt.- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hriday Narayan Harshit, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jhanjharpur P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 762 of 2021 for the offence registered under sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 325, 308, 379, 448, 504 & 506 of IPC lodged on 01.05.2021.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that due to land dispute, when the Barat was there as her daughter was going to tie nuptial knots, the allegation is that they became aggressor, armed variously, assaulted the informant's side. While retreating, they also took away the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27592 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 motorcycle. This led to the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is case and counter case, admittedly, they are agnates, there was a land dispute in which exaggerated FIR has been lodged without any injury on the side of the informant.

5. Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh on the other hand opposes the prayer submitting that contrary to their claim that they are agnates, on the day, the informant was getting his daughter married, as an aggressor they entered and assaulted them. The FIR is of the year 2021, they are named, still they have chosen to approach this Court after four years.

6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the allegation that has come coupled with the fact that none of the petitioner has criminal antecedent, in that background, it would be appropriate that they seek bail.

7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T