Radheshyam Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36868 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Radheshyam Giri S/O Late Sitaram Giri R/O Village- Mubarakpur, P.SManjhi, Distt.- Saran. 2.

Prakash Giri S/O Rahdeshyam Giri R/O Village- Mubarakpur, P.S- Manjhi, Distt.- Saran.

3.

Deepak Giri S/O Radheshyam Giri R/O Village- Mubarakpur, P.S- Manjhi, Distt.- Saran.

4.

Dharmshila Devi @ Dhrashila Devi W/O Radheshyam Giri @ Late Sitaram Giri R/O Village- Mubarakpur, P.S- Manjhi, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subodh Kumar Barnwal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the above named petitioners who apprehends their arrest in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025 for the offences under sections 115(2), 126(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS.

3. The prosecution alleges that on 12.02.2025 at about 06:00 P.M, the petitioners along with their family members, allegedly assaulted the informant and her son with iron rod, sticks and axe, causing injuries and also threatened her. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36868 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 2/3 further alleged that the petitioners had earlier cut and sold her mango tree.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner no. 4 is a lady. He has further submitted that there is land dispute between the parties and the injuries sustained are simple in nature. The allegations leveled against the petitioners are general and omnibus.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances especially the fact that petitioner no. 4 is a lady, let the petitioner no. 4, in the event of her arrest or surrenders within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned ACJM-XI, Saran at Chapra in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

7. So far as petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are concerned, the petitioners not only assaulted Punam Devi and the informant, but also assaulted their father and grandfather,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36868 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 3/3 Hareram Giri. Hareram Giri (injured) is the father of petitioner No. 1 and the grandfather of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. The son of the informant has suffered grievous injuries. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T