IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72152 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2021 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka ====================================================== Naresh Chouhan Son of Late Jaldhar Chauhan Resident of village - Amjora, P.S.- Dhoraiya, District - Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renu Kumari, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 15-10-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that a dispute arose in between Kushmi Devi and Priyanka Kumari, niece of the informant on account of drawing water from the hand pump. Further, petitioner assaulted the informant by khanti causing injury on her head and thereafter Vikash assaulted her by lathi on hand while Kushmi Devi started assaulting others by bricks. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on a trivieal dispute, an altercation took place in between Kushmi Devi and Priyanka Kumari leading to the occurence. It is further Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72152 of 2025(2) dt.15-10-2025 2/2 submitted that no doubt, it is alleged that petitioner assaulted the informant by khanti causing injury on her head but then the blow was not repeated. It is next submitted that there is no injury report on the record. It is also submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the blow was not repeated and petitioner is not a criminal as the antecedent which he carries is under Section 107 of the IPC. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his 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) 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 Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 172 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Kundan/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T