Monu Gupta @ Piyush Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82120 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2022 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar ====================================================== Monu Gupta @ Piyush Kumar S/o- Sanjeev Kumar R/o- PNT Chowk PsSahayak Dist-Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Swapnil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Katihar Nagar (S) P.S. Case no. 207 of 2022 registered under sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 354(A), 379, 504 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case as disclosed in the First Information Report is that the petitioner used to make some objectionable comments about the sister of the informant and on 09.04.2022, when the informant was trying to explain things to the petitioner to his house, the petitioner indulged in abuses and the further allegation is that while the father and mother of the petitioner caught hold of the informant and ordered him to assault, the petitioner assaulted the informant by means of a sharp cutting scissor ten to twelve times, owing to which the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82120 of 2024(5) dt.14-05-2025 2/3 informant became injured.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the outset that for an occurrence which took place on 09.04.2022 the First Information Report was registered on 14.04.2022 and the same was lodged after due thought and deliberation. It is further submitted that the allegation itself seems not believable as it has been stated that he had been instructed by his father and mother to assault and his father and mother had also held the informant. It further seems that both the informant and the petitioner are young boys of 18 and 19 years of age and they have got into some scuffle or dispute with each other owing to which the petitioner has been implicated in the present case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner also points out to the injury report of the informant which is part of the case diary and a perusal of the same would go to show that as against indiscriminate allegations of assault by means of scissor, the informant has received three injuries and the injuries though have been caused by sharp object are simple in nature. It has further been pointed out that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82120 of 2024(5) dt.14-05-2025 3/3
6. In view of the facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the tender age of the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Katihar Nagar (S) P.S. Case no. 207 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M. Katihar, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and subject to the further conditions that:
(i) The petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation/trial. (ii) However, one of the bailors would be a family member or a close relative.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Raj Ranjan U T