Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51170/2025dismissed

Mangit Yadav @ Manjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-31Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51170 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2021 Thana- SIMRI District- Buxar ====================================================== Mangit Yadav @ Manjeet Yadav S/o Namonarayan Yadav @ Namo Yadav R/o Village-Keshopur, P.S.- Simari, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, A.P.P.

for the Informant :

Mr. Satyapal Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State, and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Simri (Hata O.P.) P.S. Case No. 137 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he caused injury to the victim.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a case and counter case and that the occurrence has taken place on account of a land dispute. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a student of Intermediate and is in custody since 11.06.2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51170 of 2025(4) dt.31-10-2025 2/2

5. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has produced medical records from B.H.U., submitting that the petitioner caused grievous injury to the victim by means of a sharp-edged weapon.

6. Considering the submissions of the parties and the materials on record, it appears that the petitioner is accused of assaulting the victim with a sharp-edged weapon, resulting in grievous injury.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

8. However, if the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Neha/- U T