Sudama Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86230 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-542 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sudama Sharma S/O Late Bharat Sharma Resident of Village - Myle, Police Station- Bidupur,Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-01-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bidupur PS Case No. 542 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 74, 324(5), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that construction was going on when accused persons came and petitioner abused him, on objection petitioner assaulted him by knife causing injury on head, while other accused persons assaulted him by lathi and danda.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86230 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026 2/2 informant. It is next submitted that on account of dispute relating to land, an altercation took place in which both side assaulted each other. It is further submitted that even petitioner suffered injury on head as he was assaulted by farsa by the side of the informant, but then the side of the informant has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that there is a specific allegation against the petitioner of assaulting the informant, who is 70 years of age, by knife causing injury on temporal region as would manifest from injury report annexed as Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application, it is next submitted that knife is a dangerous weapon and head is vulnerable part of the body.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.

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

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T