IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3760 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Gautam Ram @ Gautam Kumar S/o Domi Ram Resident of Village- Parmanandpur, P.S.- Parmanandpur O.P., District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 2 28-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Madhepura (Parmanandpur O.P) P.S. Case no. 255 of 2025, registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that while he was returning, Gautam Ram and Domi Ram along with 3-4 others confronted him and started to assault him. Domi Ram is said to have assaulted the informant with a dabia on his head leading to injuries as a result of which he fell down. Thereafter on the orders of Gautam Ram, the informant was again assaulted with a dabia causing injuries in his leg. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3760 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Besides the allegation being general and omnibus in nature in so far as no specific name has been mentioned in the second assault by the dabia, the first assault by dabia is directly alleged against co- accused Domi Ram and not the petitioner herein. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not sent up for trial, however by order dated 11.9.2025 passed in Madhepura P.S. Case no.255 of 2025, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura differing with the final report has taken cognizance against the petitioner also. Hence the instant application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent. 5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R., final form having been submitted after investigation, though cognizance has been taken (certified copy of which is produced by learned counsel) together with the petitioner not having any criminal antecedent, in the facts of the case, it is directed that the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3760 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 3/3 connection with Madhepura (Parmanandpur O.P) P.S. Case no. 255 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura. Shiv/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U T