Mahendra Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66913 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- ARIYARI District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== 1.

Mahendra Chauhan son of Ram Briksh chauhan @ Rambrich Chauhan Resident of Village - Chawaniya, Ps- Ariyari, Dist- Sheikhpura 2.

Kamla Devi Wife of Mahendra Chauhan Resident of Village - Chawaniya, Ps- Ariyari, Dist- Sheikhpura 3.

Bipin chauhan @ Bipin Kumar Chauhan @ Bipin chouhan Son of Mahendra Chauhan Resident of Village - Chawaniya, Ps- Ariyari, Dist- Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bipin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajiv Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025 1.

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

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing vehemently for some time realising his difficulty, seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner No. 1, Mahendra Chauhan. 3.

Permission is accorded.

4.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with respect to petitioner No. 1, Mahendra Chauhan.

5.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66913 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 2/3 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 2 has antecedent of one case and is a woman and petitioner No. 3 is a person with clean antecedent and is a young boy aged about 19 years and the informant alleges that on 1-62025 he was going to get medicine for the cattle when he was intercepted by the accused persons including the petitioners, the accused assaulted him brutally and thinking he is dead, threw him in a pond, on account of assault, he suffered injury on his right leg, both hands, shoulder and pasli (chest), further the occurrence was committed as he refused to pay extortion of Rs. 2 lakh.

7.

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 FIR, it would manifest that the date of occurrence is 1-6-2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 6-6-2025, i.e., after a delay of five days without any plausible explanation. It is further submitted that petitioner nos. 2 and 3, being wife and son of petitioner No. 1, came to be implicated with a view to coerce petitioner No. 1

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66913 of 2025(3) dt.19-11-2025 3/3 into submission. It is also submitted that allegation of assault is not specific, but then the learned counsel fairly submits that injured received 9 injuries and opinion with regard to injury nos. 1 and 8 has been reserved and rest of the injuries have been found to be simple.

8.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

9.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, abovenamed, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Ariyari P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T