Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44899/2026bail granted

Dhananjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-07-08Mr. Justice Ritesh Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44899 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- YADOPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Dhananjay Kumar S/o Rajeshwar Prasad R/o vill - Babu Bishunpur, P.S.- Jadopur (Yadavpur), Distt.- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jadopur (Yadavpur) P.S. Case No. 26 of 2026 for allegedly having committed offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to the effect that while the informant was getting her house constructed, all the accused persons, including the petitioner, who are said to be agnates and neighbours of the informant, came armed with stick, iron rod etc. and started using filthy language against the informant. When she protested, all the accused persons started assaulting the informant, due to which

2/4 she sustained injuries and fell down on the ground. When Ravi Kumar (the son of the informant) came to save her, all the accused persons assaulted him with lathi, danda and iron rod, by using filthy language. It has further been alleged that in the meantime, other co-accused persons came from behind and started assaulting the informant and her son and also used filthy language against them. It has further been alleged that the petitioner assaulted on the head of the son of the informant, due to which he sustained injuries.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. He submits that the petitioner and the informant are agnates and there is dispute in between the parties. He submits that from the First Information Report itself, it would transpire that the First Information Report has been lodged with regard to installation of plastic pipe in the water tank. He further submits that from the injury report which has been discussed in the impugned order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in A.B.P. No.393 of 2026, the injuries sustained by the injured have been found to be simple in nature by the treating doctor. It is also submitted that the petitioner has got a clean antecedent.

5. Per contra, the learned APP appearing on behalf of

3/4 the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Having considered the rival submissions and after going through the records, it appears that there is dispute in between the parties, due to which the present occurrence has taken place. From perusal of the injury report which has been discussed in the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in A.B.P. No.393 of 2026, it would transpire that the injuries were found to be simple in nature by the treating doctor. Further, the petitioner has got a clean antecedent.

7. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection with Jadopur (Yadavpur) P.S. Case No.26 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S with a further condition that:- The learned court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found

4/4 that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Ritesh Kumar, J.) Sanjay/- U T