Vidyasagar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58719 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2025 Thana- SONHAN District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.

Vidyasagar S/o- Vishnu Ram Resident of Narayanpur P.S- Sonhan DistKaimur 2.

Suraj Ram S/o- Jagnarayan Ram Resident of Narayanpur P.S- Sonhan DistKaimur 3.

Babulal Ram S/o- Mahendra Ram Resident of Narayanpur P.S- Sonhan DistKaimur 4.

Niraj Ram S/o- Ramwatar Ram Resident of Narayanpur P.S- Sonhan DistKaimur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aquaib Khan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-09-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Rabindra Kumar. 2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sonhan P.S. Case No. 138 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 127(2), 303(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioners in a drunken condition in the night came

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58719 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 2/3 to his shop and asked him to open the shop, it is alleged that moment the shop was opened, the four accused assaulted him by knife causing injury on lips and his tooth broke, further they looted an amount of Rs. 30,000/-.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that though informant alleges that he was assaulted by knife by the accused persons, but then the allegation of assault is not specific rather is general and omnibus in nature.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State, Shri Rabindra Kumar vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits what is not disputed rather stands admitted is that there is specific allegation of the informant against the accused persons of assaulting by knife causing injury. It is next submitted that three injures were caused to the informant, as would manifest from the order impugned, out of which two injures are opined to be simple and one injury is opined to be grievous, it is also submitted that injury was on vital part of the body, i.e., mouth. It is next submitted that no doubt the allegation of assault is not specific but then the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58719 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 3/3 informant received injuries by knife and in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, that would amount to travesty of justice, moreso when informant has received grievous injury. It is also submitted that investigation in the case is still continuing.

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.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T