Dharam Nath Ray @ Dharmnath Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55870 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2025 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Dharam Nath Ray @ Dharmnath Ray S/o Late Banshi Ray R/o Village - Sanker Pur ,P.S- Shahpur, P.O - Shahpur, District - Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sudarshan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State though
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Shahpur P.S. Case No. 179 of 2025 instituted under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 lodged on 22.04.2025 by the informant, Police Rai.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that due to altercation between the accused and the informant's side, the petitioner alongwith three sons started abusing and then assaulted Tarkishore Ray. The allegation is that this petitioner assaulted him with iron rod on his head causing injury. Ram Pravesh Ray also got injury on hand and chest. Tarkishore Ray was treated at Danapur Sadar Hospital and P.M.C.H., Patna for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55870 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/2 further treatment. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is counter case also lodged by one Bittu Kumar from their side, injury suffered by both the sides and no abnormality has been found in their injuries which suggest it to be simple in nature.
5. Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP on the other hand opposing the prayer submits that a perusal of the learned Sessions Judge order would show that a linear undisplaced fracture of left frontal bone and scalp was found on the injured. The injury matches with the allegation made in the FIR.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the injury that the injured suffered at the hand of the petitioner, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail which is accordingly, rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T