Chandan Gupta @ Chandan Kr. Gupta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43979 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2026 Thana- CHUTIA SAHAYAK District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Chandan Gupta @ Chandan Kr. Gupta S/O Ram Pavan Sah R/o VillageAmahua, P.S- Chutia ,Distt- Rohtas 2.
Gita Devi W/o Ram Pavan Sah R/o Village- Amahua, P.S- Chutia ,DisttRohtas 3.
Gautam Kumar Gupta @ Gautam Kumar S/o Ram Pavan Sah R/o VillageAmahua, P.S- Chutia ,Distt- Rohtas 4.
Chandani Devi W/o Vikash Gupta R/o Village-Ulli, P.S- Nauhatta ,DisttRohtas 5.
Sonu Kumar Gupta @ Sonu Kumar S/o Mithlesh Sah R/o Village- Bhaluadi, P.S- Indrapuri ,Distt- Rohtas 6.
Pramod Kumar Gupta @ Pramod Kumar S/o Mithlesh Sah R/o VillageBhaluadi, P.S- Indrapuri ,Distt- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Deovind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Rudra Pratap Singh, Advocate Mr. Saurabh Suman, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Deovind Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The informant is represented through Mr. Rudra Pratap Singh, learned Advocate.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chuttia P.S. Case No. 39/2026, registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 109, 392(3), 351(2), 352, 191(2) of the BNS and 3,4 of Dayan Act.
2/4
3. Allegedly on the given date and time of occurrence while the parents of the informant were going towards forest for collecting Mahua the petitioners who happen to be own patidar along with other unknown persons caught hold of their parents and dragged his father by abusing and assaulting and locked him inside the house. Further, the petitioners along with others caught hold the mother of the informant and other family members and started mercilessly assaulting due to which both the parents have sustained serious injuries.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the admittedly, the parties are patidar and on account of some trifle, they entered into a scuffle resulting into some unfortunate injuries. So far the injuries which are allegedly sustained to the father of the informant is concerned, the same has been found to be simple in nature whereas the mother of the informant has sustained two simple injuries besides a fracture of ankle which is later on declared as greivous in nature. however, the same is not on vital part but rather caused in unfortunate scuffle. It is further contended that there is counter version of the present case being Chuttia P.S. Case no. 40/2026 instituted against the informant and others, the copy of which is also place on record as Annexure P/2.
3/4
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State and the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that there is specific accusation against all these petitioners that they have illegally confined the father of the petitioner and brutally assaulted the parents of the petitioners mercilessly due to which they sustained serious injury and one of the injury sustained to the mother of the informant has been found to be grievous in nature. It is further contended that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 also carry a criminal antecedent. Moreover, the counter version is nothing but concocted one instituted two days after the institution of the present case in order to put pressure and wreck vengeance.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the parties are patidar and because of previous dispute they entered into a scuffle resulting into some unfortunate injuries, besides injuries on non vital part as also the undertaking given by the petitioner that they shall not be indulged in such activities in future, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand)
4/4 each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dehri in connection with Chuttia P.S. Case No. 39/2026, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further conditions that (i) one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(ii) that if the petitioners shall be found indulge in such activities in future or threaten the informant and his family members, in such circumstances, the informant and the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the bail of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) siddharth kr.
shaw/- U T