Ram Parvesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29978 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2025 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Ram Parvesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh S/O Jageshwar Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur.

2.

Kundan Kumar S/O Ram Parvesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur.

3.

Ajad Kuar S/O Ram Parvesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur. 4.

Ankita Kumari D/O Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur.

5.

Sunita Devi W/O Ram Parvesh Singh @ Ram Pravesh Singh @ Ram Prabesh Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur.

6.

Ram Partap Singh S/O Jank Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.STajpur, Dist.- Samastipur. 7.

Shanti Devi W/O Ram Partap Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.STajpur, Dist.- Samastipur. 8.

Jyoti Kumari W/O Pankaj Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.STajpur, Dist.- Samastipur. 9.

Nanki @ Parmeshwar Singh @ Mahesh Singh S/O Jageshwar Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur. 10.

Ram Ratan Singh S/O Jageshwar Singh Resident of Village- Harpur Bhind, P.S- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shambhu Sn Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Singh Shastri, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

2/4

2. The accused/petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 148 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2),126(2),115(2),117(2),118(1),74,303(2),351(2) and 352 of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita.

3. As per FIR, all petitioners alleged to assault informant and her family members by using lathi, iron rod etc., causing head and bodily injuries. The aforesaid injuries alleged to be caused with intention to cause the death of injured. Occurrence alleged to be taken place due to trivial neighbourhood disputes and differences.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the present occurrence is basically free fight in nature, where both parties received injuries. It is submitted that the occurrence took place due to trivial issues regarding crossing of cable wire. It is submitted that for the same set of occurrence, the petitioners's side also lodged a case, which was registered as Tajpur P.S. Case No. 153/25.

5. Arguing further while explaining the injuries, it is

3/4 pointed out that the injury of injured Ravi Kishan and Sharwan Kumar, upon medical examination found simple in nature. It is also pointed out that injury of injured/informant, namely, Renu Devi upon medical examination further found simple in nature. There was no visible external injury upon Banarsi Devi and injury of Raj Kamal Singh and Shankar Singh were also found simple in nature. Explaining the injury of Sushila Devi, it is submitted that only tenderness was found present upon her leg and there was no bony injury. It is submitted that the petitioners's side also received grievous injuries and their treatment was continued upto Patna Medical College and Hospital, considering the seriousness.

6. Arguing further, it is submitted that from the nature of injuries and manner of occurrence, it can be safely said that the petitioners were not under intention to cause death of the injured. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon the legal report of Hon'ble Supreme Court as available through State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Shamsher Singh, reported as 2025 SCC OnLine SC 807.

7. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.

4/4

8. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as alleged occurrence prima facie appears free fight in nature, where injuries as alleged to be caused by petitioners upon medical examination found simple in nature, negating prima facie intention to cause death, accordingly, all above named ten petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. I, Samastipur/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 148 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T