IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29231 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-262 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== 1. Golu yadav @ Pawan yadav @ Pawan Kumar Yadav Son of Krishna yadav Resident of Village- Dumaigarh Ps- Manjhi District -Saran at Chapra 2. Ram Milan yadav son of Bharat yadav Resident of Village- Dumaigarh Ps- Manjhi District -Saran at Chapra 3. Aman Kumar @ Aman Kumar Yadav Son of Bharat yadav Resident of Village- Dumaigarh Ps- Manjhi District -Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 262 of 2025, dated 13.07.2025, lodged under Sections 115(2), 331(4), 137(2), 351(3), 352, 61(2), 303(2) and 308(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”), pending before the Court of A.C.J.M., 4th, Saran at Chapra. 3. As per the prosecution, an FIR has been lodged against six named accused persons, including the present petitioners, with the allegation that all the accused persons, in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29231 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 connivance with each other, assaulted the informant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Counsel further submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that the present case has been lodged over a petty dispute. Counsel further submits that the doctor found the injuries to be simple in nature. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedents of the petitioners are not clean, as seven criminal cases are pending against petitioner No. 1, one criminal case is pending against petitioner No. 2, and three criminal cases are pending against petitioner No. 3. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that there are specific allegations against the present petitioners. Counsel further submits that the petitioners do not have clean antecedents and, considering their previous history, they appear to be habitual offenders. 6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29231 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 3/3 7. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioners that if they surrender within four weeks, the Trial Court shall pass orders on their surrender-cum-bail applications on the same day, without being prejudiced by the fact that their anticipatory bail applications have been rejected by this Court. The Trial Court shall pass orders on the merits of the case. Aman Kumar/- (Dr. Anshuman, J.) U T