Nagendra Chandarbanshi @ Nagendra Chandravanshi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28821 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-455 Year-2024 Thana- PALIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Nagendra Chandarbanshi @ Nagendra Chandravanshi S/o Late Raj Narain Chandrabanshi R/o Village- Karkat Bigaha, P.S.- Paliganj, District- Patna 2.

Narendra Chandarbanshi @ Narendra Chandravanshi @ Tootu Chandravanshi @ Tooddu Chandravanshi S/o Late Raj Narain Chandrabanshi R/o Village- Karkat Bigaha, P.S.- Paliganj, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Paliganj P.S. Case No. 455 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126, 115(2), 118, 109, 103, 352 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are in custody since 12.11.2024 and the allegation against the petitioners is of assaulting the father of the informant by Khanti causing injury on head leading to his death.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no doubt in the FIR, it is alleged that petitioners assaulted the father

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28821 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/2 of the informant by Khanti causing injury on head leading to his death, but then from perusal of the postmortem report, it would manifest that father of the informant suffered only one injury on head, when allegation is against both the petitioners.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that what is not in dispute rather stands admitted is that father of the informant died on account of assault. It is also submitted that petitioners are alleged to have assaulted by Khanti on head leading to death of the father of the informant. It is also submitted that in the postmortem report, it is recorded that the deceased suffered one injury on head, but then the benefit of regular bail cannot be granted to the petitioners on the said pretext.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioners on bail.

7. Accordingly, the instant regular bail application stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T