Pramod Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38707 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-359 Year-2024 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

Pramod Pandey S/o Late Rajendra Pandey R/o Vill.- Bahlolpur, P.S.- Paroo, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 2.

Bindu Devi W/o Pramod Pandey R/o Vill.- Bahlolpur, P.S.- Paroo, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1, namely, Pramod Pandey has been arrested during the pendency of this anticipatory bail application, as such, he wants to withdraw the anticipatory bail application on behalf of petitioner no. 1.

3. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn in so far as it relates to petitioner no. 1, namely, Pramod Pandey.

4. The anticipatory bail application, now, confines to petitioner no. 2.

5. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends arrest in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38707 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 2/3 with Paroo P.S. Case No. 359 of 2024 dated 10.10.2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 127(2), 117(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiyay Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

6. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the alleged date of occurrence, petitioner no. 2 and other accused persons brutally assaulted the son of the informant due to which his eye became injured. When his son started crying, then petitioner no. 2 pressed his mouth and neck due to which he became unconscious. The informant went to doctor for treatment of his son where from he was referred to I.G.I.M.S., Patna. After operation, the doctor suggested to go to Chennai because he has lost his eyesight.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner no. 2 is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that F.I.R. has been lodged on 10.10.2024 after 25 days of occurrence without any plausible explanation of the delay. There is no injury report available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 further submits that the informant is not the eye-witness of the occurrence. Both the parties are agnates and there is land dispute between them. Lastly, it has been submitted that petitioner no. 2 is lady having no criminal antecedents.

8. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 2.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38707 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 3/3

9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest / surrender of the petitioner no. 2 , namely, Bindu Devi, within a period of six weeks from today, in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 359 of 2024, she will be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Muzaffarpur West subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, (Khatim Reza, J) premchand/- U T