Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24562 (PAT)

Govind Kumar @ Suman Saurabh v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./23246/2026 · 2026-07-14

Rajiv Roy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23246 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2025 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1. Govind Kumar @ Suman Saurabh Son of Suresh Mahto Resident of Village - Gannipur Bhanpur, P.S. - Baligaon, District - Vaishali. 2. Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Saurabh Son of Suresh Mahto Resident of Village - Gannipur Bhanpur, P.S. - Baligaon, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP For the Informant : Mr. Rambabu Yadav, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 5 14-07-2026 Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned APP representing the State as also Mr. Rambabu Yadav, learned counsel representing the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Baligaon P.S. Case No. 149 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 117(2), 76 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, lodged on 10.09.2025 by the informant Ramsewak Singh. 3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that while he was filling mud in front of his house, the accused came and the allegation is that Govind Kumar gave khukhri blow on the head as also on the back causing injury. Further Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23246 of 2026(5) dt.14-07-2026 2/2 allegation against Subham Kumar is of using sword to chopped up finger of his son while Renu Devi was assaulted by Suresh Mahto. This led to the F.I.R. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the Govind Kumar is concerned, the medical report shows that the opinion was reserved. 5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that the report clearly show that the injury on the head has been blacked out by the concerned Medical Officer for which a complaint has been lodged with the D.I.G. of the said range. The submission is that twice, he gave blow on the head and the back while Shubham Kumar chopped off one of the finger of his son. 6. Taking into allegation that has come against the petitioners which caused injuries/chopping of the finger, no relief can be extended. 7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U T