Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41780 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2024 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Manju Devi Wife of Baiju Sahani Resident of village - Majhav Tola Godhiya, Ward no.- 16, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District - East Champaran, Motihari 2.
Baiju Sahani Son of Sukhal Sahani Resident of village - Majhav Tola Godhiya, Ward no.- 16, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District - East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 16-10-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Pakarideyal P.S. Case No. 306 of 2024 instituted under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 76, 303(2) of B.N.S., 2023 lodged on 03.12.2024 by the informant, Rekha Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant's cousin father-in-law was assaulted by Baiju Sahani and Arvind Kumar with iron rod beside Manju Devi assaulted with 'Kudal'. As he fell down, the husband came to rescue, the allegation is that Baiju Sahani and Babita Devi gave iron rod blow causing fracture on the hand. Further allegation is of snatching of gold
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41780 of 2025(3) dt.16-10-2025 2/2 chain. They were referred to Muzaffarpur for better treatment which led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is case and counter case, land dispute has led to the present FIR, they have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP, Mr. Bharat Bhushan and learned counsel for the informant have jointly taken this Court to the injury report which are the part of the case diary to show that the injuries on the injured persons namely Akhilesh Sahni and Naresh Sahni have been found to be grievous in nature.
6. Taking into account the aforesaid facts as also that the injuries have been found to be grievous in nature, in that background, no relief can be extended.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T