IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18026 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2024 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Raju Mishra S/o- Late Paras Mishra Resident of Vill- Babu Tola, Garabhua, P.S.- Sirisiya, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 23-07-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 68 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126, 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of BNS. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that he was cleaning the pond when accused persons came and petitioner assaulted by farsa causing injury on forehead and nose, further Suraj and Karan assaulted by knife causing injury on leg and thigh, thereafter Karan, Khushi and Suraj assaulted his brother who came to save him. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18026 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant along with his family members, it is next submitted that the date of occurrence is 15.08.2024 and the fardbayan of the informant was recorded on 18.08.2024 in the hospital and thereafter the FIR came to be instituted on 26.08.2024 i.e. after a delay of 8 days and was sent to the Court on 10.09.2024 i.e. after 14 days of institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that no doubt the fardbayan of the informant was recorded three days after the occurrence, but then he was admitted in the hospital for his treatment on account of injury suffered due to assault. It is also submitted that if the fardbayan of the informant was recorded after some delay, the informant cannot be faulted. It is next submitted that no doubt the FIR came to be instituted eight days after the fardbayan was recorded, but for that also, the informant cannot be faulted, it is next submitted that if police sent the FIR after delay of 14 days before the learned Trial Court whether the informant can be faulted for the same. It is further submitted that the injury suffered by the injured is opined to be grievous and is on vital Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18026 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 part of the body i.e. forehead and nose, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the informant by farsa which is a sharp edged weapon, but then the wound is lacerated caused by hard and blunt substance, on which the learned APP submits that farsa has both sides, sharp side and blunt side. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands rejected. Rishabh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T