Bhim Shankar Mehta @ Bhim Shankar Kumar @ Bhim Mehta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44178 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2025 Thana- Lokha District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
Bhim Shankar Mehta @ Bhim Shankar Kumar @ Bhim Mehta son of Late Dev Narayan Mehta @ Debu Mehta Resident Of Village- Kajaha Ward No 15 PS- Laukaha District Supaul 2.
Vijay Mehta son of Khattar Mehta Resident Of Village- Kajaha Ward No 15 PS- Laukaha District Supaul 3.
Jayshankar Kumar @ Jay shankar Mehta Son of Chhote Lal Mehta Resident Of Village- Kajaha Ward No 15 PS- Laukaha District Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Madhura Nand Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 126(2)/115(2)109/ 303(2)/352/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per F.I.R., the informant namely Balbhadur Bharti alleged that on 05.04.2025 at about 12:30 A.M., the petitioners along with other co-accused started harvesting the crop from the field of the informant. On protest, all the accused persons including petitioners No. 1 and 2 assaulted the informant and petitioner No. 3 is alleged to have removed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44178 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2025 2/2 nail of the informant's brother. It is also alleged that they took away crop worth rupees thirty thousand from the filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land in question does not belong to informant and has been purchased by the accused persons. Petitioners have right, title and possession over the land. Title Suit No. 386 of 2024 is pending between the parties. It was the informant side who were cutting the crops which was objected by the petitioners which led to simple marpit in which both sides sustained injuries. Petitioners claim clean criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition. He submits that the specific accusation of assault is against these three petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts & circumstances and the specific accusation of assault is against these petitioners, this application is dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Saif/- U T