Pilua Saw v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35976 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-147 Year-2024 Thana- PIRI BAZAR District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Pilua Saw S/o- Late Kapil Dev Saw @ Kapildev Saw R/Vill- Kashichak, P.S.- Piribazar, Dist-Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binay Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. M.K. Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-07-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Piribazar P.S. Case No.147 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Allegedly, in the evening of the fateful day, while the informant was present at his flour mill, the petitioner, along with the other accused persons, entered into the shop and demanded a sum of Rs.20,000, which the informant had allegedly withdrawn upon surrender of his L.I.C. policy. When the informant expressed his inability to pay the said amount, the petitioner allegedly assaulted him on the head with a stone, as a result of which he sustained a head injury. There are further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35976 of 2026(3) dt.23-07-2026 2/3 allegations against the other accused persons of having assaulted the informant.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the genesis of the occurrence itself indicates that the dispute arose out of the alleged withdrawal of the amount received on surrender of the L.I.C. policy and, at the heat of rage, the petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the informant with a stone. It is contended that, having regard to the nature of the weapon used, the manner of assault, and the attending circumstances, there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to cause such injury, much less any grievous injury. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a clean antecedent and undertakes to cooperate with the investigation as well as the proceedings of the Court.
5. Learned Advocate for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the petitioner caused a grievous injury to the informant and, therefore, does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Having regard to submissions advanced on behalf of the respective parties and considering the nature of the accusation, the delay in lodging of the F.I.R., the nature of the weapon allegedly used and the fair antecedent of the petitioner,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35976 of 2026(3) dt.23-07-2026 3/3 let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M. Lakhisarai in connection with Piribazar P.S. Case No.147 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T