DHARMA SINGH @ BABU DHARMNATH v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./73920/2025 · 2026-02-02
Prabhat Kumar Singh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40288 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40288 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73920 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2024 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria ====================================================== DHARMA SINGH @ BABU DHARMNATH S/O SURENDRA SINGH @ SUMAN SINHA R/o vill - Sondiha, Ward no. 16, P.s.- Pasraha, Distt.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP For the Informant : Mr. Amrit Raj, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 5 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that on 30.07.2024, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, stormed the house of informant, armed with lathi and iron rod and started assaulting father-in-law of informant as a result of which, he died during course of treatment.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73920 of 2025(5) dt.02-02-2026 2/2 committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, along with co-accused Chandani Devi, assaulted father-in-law of informant with brick and stone due to which, he died during course of treatment.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T