Arjun Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38058 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2025 Thana- Jagdishpur District- West Champaran ====================================================== Arjun Chaudhary Son of - Late Malakh Chaudhary @ Late Malakh Sahni Resident of village - Jhakhra, P.S. - Jagdishpur District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 268 of 2025, dated 23.12.2025, lodged under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 351(2), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNS, 2023"), pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against 08 named and 4-5 unknown accused persons, including the present petitioner, alleging that the informant and his cousin used to run a jewellery shop, from which the accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38058 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3 had purchased jewellery worth Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lakhs), out of which Rs. 80,000 (Rupees Eighty Thousand) remained due. Upon demand being made by the informant, a heated exchange took place. Subsequently, it has been alleged that all the named accused persons and others assaulted the informant and his cousin, in which the informant's cousin died due to the said assault.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean. Counsel further submits that the petitioner's name has been inserted in the present case with an ulterior motive. Counsel further submits that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence and has unnecessarily been made an accused in the present case. Counsel also submits that the petitioner is ready to fulfil all the conditions whatsoever that may be imposed upon him.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that, although the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean, there is a specific allegation against the present petitioner and others that they were involved in the said assault.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38058 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T