Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44356/2025disposed

Ravi Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-17Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44356 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2024 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== Ravi Choudhary S/o Nanhak Choudhary Resident of Village-Punaul, P.S.- Gurua, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-10-2025 Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, along with Mr.

Deepak Kumar and Ms. Isha Mishra, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 291 of 2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 127(1),115(2),117(2),74,303(2),3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the cattle of the petitioner was grazing in the field of the informant and when an objection was made by the informant, the petitioner, along with other co-accused, entered into the house of the informant and assaulted her and at the same time, outraged the modesty of

2/4 her daughter and also assaulted her family members.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. So far as, the nature of allegation alleged against the petitioner is concerned, it is due to enmity between the parties, due to land dispute, over which cattle of the petitioner was grazing the crop of the informant. Learned counsel submitted that due to minor dispute the petitioner has been made accused in the present case. The petitioner, in his self-defence, may have caused some injury on the person of the informant and her family members and the injury is not recorded in the impugned order, as to whether, the same is simple or grievous in nature There is case and counter case between the parties. He further submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent. On these grounds, the learned counsel seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the content of allegation made in the FIR and the impugned order, I find that there is case and counter case between the parties, on the

3/4 allegation that the cattle of the petitioner was grazing in the field of the informant and when an objection was made by the informant, it led to a fierce fight, in which the petitioner, in his self-defence, may have caused some injury on the person of the informant and her family members and the nature of injury is not recorded in the impugned order, as to whether, the same is simple or grievous in nature. I am of the opinion that the petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail

7. Learned District Court is directed to call for injury report and verify, as to whether, the injury is simple or grievous in nature. If the injury is found to be simple in nature, the learned District Court is directed to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 291 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the BNSS/438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

8. The learned District Court is also directed to

4/4 verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.

9. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U