Sanjeev Kumar Choudhary @ Sanjeev Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91886 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2025 Thana- KHIRHAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar Choudhary @ Sanjeev Choudhary S/o- Late Kusheshwar Choudhary R/v- Bourhar Ps- Khairhar Dist- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Murari Narain Chaudhary, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.

Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Adv.

Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Adv.

for the State : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Khirhar P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025 dated 18.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the petitioner and others had brutally assaulted the informant and had caused fracture of his right arm.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that there is a long standing dispute between the parties and a series of cases have also been registered against each

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91886 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 other and in fact even the present case is a counter case to the earlier case filed by the petitioner's side which has been brought on record by way of Annexure P/2. It has further been submitted that on account of land dispute this false and concocted case has been lodged. In the present case however, no such incident as alleged has occurred and in fact, the injured had fracture in his hand upon falling. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has four criminal antecedents and the cases are of similar nature between the petitioner and the informant's family and other cases.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner is an accused of repeated assault on the informant causing head injury as well as fracture of his right arm. It has further submitted that the petitioner though has stated four criminal antecedents however the petitioner carries six criminal antecedents and two have been suppressed. It has further been submitted that the intention of the petitioner is evident from the repeated blows and therefore, the petitioner should not be granted the liberty of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby dismissed and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91886 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 3/3 Court below concerned within four weeks from the date of this order and pray for regular bail, the learned Court below may consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on its own merits without being prejudiced by this order.

7. The application stands dismissed.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Gautam/- U T