Kusum Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61286 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- TARARI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.

Kusum Devi W/o Dhaneshwar Singh R/o Village - Bhadsera, P.S. - Tarari, Distt- Bhojpur 2.

Dhaneshwar Singh @ Dhanji Singh @ Dhaneshwar Sing S/o Sidh Nath Singh R/o Village - Bhadsera, P.S. - Tarari, Distt- Bhojpur 3.

Shivraj Singh @ Siraj Singh S/o Sidh Nath Singh R/o Village - Bhadsera, P.S. - Tarari, Distt- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Tarari P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 for the offence under Sections 191(2), 190, 333, 109, 303(2) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that on 23.06.2025 at about 06:30 AM, a group of ten accused persons entered into her house and accused Jai Prakash Kumar disrobed her daughter, Shanti Kumari, and began tearing her clothes with bad intentions. When the Complainant intervened to protect her daughter, Jai Prakash Kumar allegedly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61286 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/3 assaulted her on the head with an iron rod, inflicting a severe cut injury. Concurrently, Siraj Singh, armed with a stick, struck the daughter, Shanti Kumari, also causing a head injury, while Amitesh Kumar hit the younger son, with a stick. Furthermore, Dhaneshwar Singh and his son Deepak Kumar attacked the Complainant and her father with sticks, resulting in serious injuries. In addition to the assaults, the accused committed acts of theft and robbery. In the impugned order, merely one injury of smaller size has been mentioned.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are quite innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case due to land dispute. Petitioner no. 1 and informant are Gotani whereas Petitioner no. 2 and Petitioner no. 3 are own brother. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are so many cases pending between both the parties, and the present case is also a result of Tarari P.S. Case no. 114 of 2025 in which three accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 65411 of 2025. The previous disputes are also admitted in the F.I.R. itself. In the impugned order merely one injury of smaller size has been mentioned.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61286 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 3/3

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhojpur, Ara, in connection with Tarari P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., further condition is that one of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioners.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U T