IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20468 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2024 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1. Baliram Choudhary son of Ram Prasad Choudhary village- Shesha tola, Ps- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhojpur 2. Ram Darshan Chaudhary son of Ram Ekbal Chaudhary village- Shesha tola, Ps- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhojpur 3. Raj Bhogan chaudhary Son of Ram Darshan Chaudhary village- Shesha tola, Ps- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhojpur 4. Balmiki Kumar @ Balmiki chaudhary son of Late Shiv Prasan Chaudhary village- Shesha tola, Ps- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhojpur 5. Saroj Chaudhary @ Saroj Kumar Saroj Kumar Chaudhary son of Shiv Parsan Chaudhary village- Shesha tola, PSs- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rabindra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 3 13-08-2025 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Jagdishpur Police Station Case No. 330 of 2024, dated 27.09.2024, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 191 (2)/190/103(1)/238(A)/352/351(2) (3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 19.09.2024, at about 5 PM, the petitioners and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20468 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/5 other accused persons, named in the First Information Report, arrived, along with sword, lathi and other weapons, at the shop of the son of the petitioner, namely, Sannu @ Sonu and started assaulting him due to land dispute and when the husband of the informant came to know about the incident, he rushed towards the place of occurrence in order to protect his son. The accused persons abused and threatened him and also assaulted the husband of the informant. They also threatened that within two days, they would show the consequences if the land is not vacated by the informant and her husband. On the very next date, on 20.09.2024, when the husband of the informant in order to resolve the dispute went to the Sarpanch of Ratandandi at about 7 AM for resolution of the land dispute, since then, he did not return back home. On 26.09.2024, the informant got the information that the dead body of her husband was found in the river and alleged that the petitioners, along with other accused persons, with previous enmity and due to land dispute, killed her husband and threw the dead body in the river. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no cogent evidence against the petitioners and they have Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20468 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 3/5 been made accused merely on the basis of suspicion. The dead body of the deceased was found on 26.09.2024 and the first occurrence of missing of the deceased had taken place on 20.09.2024. The allegation of threatening on the part of the petitioners is not correct and is completely fabricated. The decomposed body of the deceased was taken out of the river and the cause of death has not been ascertained by the doctor as yet and viscera has been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for its examination. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, referring o the case diary, argued that just a few days before the dead body of the deceased was found, there was scuffle between the deceased, his son and the accused persons, relating to the land dispute. The informant has expressed strong suspicion against the accused persons, including the petitioners of killing and throwing the body of the deceased in the river. The offence alleged is serious in nature and if anticipatory bail is granted, the police may not have the chance of custodial interrogation of the petitioners. 6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have gone through the materials available on record, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20468 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 4/5 including the case diary. 7. The first occurrence has taken place on 19.09.2024 when the husband and son of the informant were assaulted by the accused persons, including the petitioners and on the very next day when the husband of the informant went to meet the Sarpanch in order to resolve the land dispute on 20.09.2024, since then he is missing and his dead body was found after six days on 26.09.2024. The Supervising Authority, in the supervision note, has noted that the petitioner no. 1, Baliram Choudhary, wanted to sell the land appertaining to the old house, but the same was being objected by the deceased, Jagdish Choudhary, claiming to be the land of his ancestors. Due to the land dispute between the accused persons and the deceased, on many occasions, scuffle and fight had taken place between them. The conduct of the petitioners and other accused persons were suspicious since the missing of the husband of the informant and they were found absconding from the date when the dead body of the deceased was recovered. 8. Considering the aforesaid discussion and the fact that in the close proximity of time, there was fight between the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20468 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 5/5 deceased, his son and the accused persons, including the petitioners, recovery of the dead body of the deceased from the river and the materials collected during investigation, including the supervision note, I am not inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail. 9. This application is, accordingly, dismissed Prabhakar Anand/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) U √ T √