IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91704 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2025 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia ====================================================== Gyanchand Mandal @ Gyanchandra Mandal, Son of Late Nasib Mandal, Resident of Village- Khajuraho Kamat, Ward No.12, P.S.-Barhara @ Barhara Kothi, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Sushil Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Surya Kant Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Giri, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 5 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Barhara Kothi P.S. Case no.242 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the four named accused persons including the petitioner herein came variously armed and started abusing his father. His father asked them not to abuse on which the petitioner is said to have assaulted the father of the informant with a lathi. The other accused persons are also said to have assaulted him. It is further Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91704 of 2025(5) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 stated that soon thereafter, the father of the informant fell down and died. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of past dispute between the parties. From the contents of the F.I.R. itself it would transpire that the informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and states that he reached there on hearing halla. The allegations against the petitioner are general and omnibus in nature and he is in custody since 24.11.2025. 5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. of having assaulted the father of the informant with a lathi leading to his death. Learned counsel submits that the corresponding injury has been found in the postmortem report. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R. together with the contents of the postmortem report, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. 7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91704 of 2025(5) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 prayer for bail after completing one year in custody and framing of charge, whichever is later. avinash/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U T