Bittu Mandal @ Bittu Kumar @ Bittu Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47710 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2025 Thana- BHAWANIPUR District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.

Bittu Mandal @ Bittu Kumar @ Bittu kumar Mandal S/O Ramesh Mandal Resident of Village- Ganeshhida, P.S.- Bhawanipur, District- Purnea 2.

Sithu Kumar @ Sithu Mandal @ Sittu Kumar S/O Ramesh Mandal Resident of Village- Ganeshhida, P.S.- Bhawanipur, District- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-07-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Bhawanipur P.S. Case No.74/2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.S.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are alleged to have assaulted the son of the informant, who was trying to save the D.J. vehicle for being vandalized by the petitioners and was also trying to save the driver of the D.J. vehicle, when he was assaulted.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47710 of 2025(2) dt.30-07-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no doubt the allegation of assault is alleged against the petitioners but then there was a dispute on account of playing of D.J. music in the marriage, which was being objected by the petitioners, which led to a dispute, in which both side assaulted each other. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is also submitted that there is a delay of 14 days in instituting the FIR.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that no doubt there is a delay in instituting the instant FIR but then the informant, who is mother of the victim has furnished her explanation stating that on account of paucity of fund, she was busy in getting the victim treated, as such there was some delay. The learned APP next submits that the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be grievous and the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the victim on head i.e. vital part of the body causing grievous injury.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47710 of 2025(2) dt.30-07-2025 3/3 is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T