Murat Chaudhari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32499 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2025 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Murat Chaudhari Son of Bikram Chaudhari, Resident of Village- Bhatwaliya, Ward No. 05, P.S.- Yagapatti, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 389 of 2025, dated 14.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 74, 109(1), 117(2), 351(2) and 352 read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, in the background of drainage of water in the land of petitioner, the petitioner and other co-accused persons picked a fight with the informant and they assaulted him causing injuries to him. The wife of the informant was also assaulted.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. No occurrence in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32499 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 2/3 manner as alleged has ever taken place. There is a counter version and petitioner has instituted Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 397 of 2025, which is prior in time and which was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of the petitioner as the petitioner was brutally assaulted by the informant's side. Learned counsel further submits that in fact, the injury report falsifies the allegation levelled on petitioner and other co-accused persons as no farsa injury was found on the informant and all the injures on the informant are lacerated wounds, though three injuries were stated to be grievous due to fracture of bones. Learned counsel further submits that the present FIR has been lodged after much delay as for an occurrence of 24.08.2025, the FIR has been registered on 14.09.2025. Coupled with the injury report, this delay shows the false implication of the petitioner. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is having clean antecedent. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 01.03.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the case and its counter version and the background of land dispute
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32499 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 3/3 and further considering absence of injuries attributed to the petitioner and also considering petitioner's period of custody, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran / concerned Court, in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 389 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) Shahnawaz/- U T