Pintu Sao @ Pintu Kr. Gupta v. The State Of Bihar
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84390 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2025 Thana- AMBA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.
Pintu Sao @ Pintu Kr. Gupta Son of Late Nandlal Sao R/o vill. Sanda, P.S.- Amba, District - Aurangabad 2.
Pappu Kumar Son of Krishna Sao R/o village - Satgawan, P.S.- Hariharganj, District - Palamu (Jharkhand) 3.
Sarswati Devi Wife of Pintu Sao @ Pintu Kr. Gupta R/o vill. Sanda, P.S.- Amba, District - Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-12-2025 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 135 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS.
3. On account of a dispute arisen due to drainage of waters, the petitioners along with others started abusing the informant and his family members. When the same was protested, the petitioners along with others variously armed with iron rod and lathi brutally assaulted, due to which the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84390 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 2/3 and his wife sustained serious injuries.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners referring to the FIR contended that the parties are none else but close relatives. The petitioner no. 1 and the informant are full brother, since the parties were bickering over a land dispute, it resulted into some scuffle and unfortunate injuries. Admittedly, the informant and his wife has sustained some injuries, but the injury which is allegedly sustained to the wife over her hand and found to be grievous in nature, is on non vital part. The petitioners are persons of fair antecedent and the genesis of the occurrence is said to be a trifle.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the petitioners have actively participated in the crime and brutally assaulted the informant and his wife.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the close relationship between the parties as well as fair antecedent of the petitioners, besides the injuries on non vital part, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84390 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 3/3 copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 135 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with further following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(ii) If the petitioners are found involve in intimidating/ threatening the witnesses or the informant or would indulge in such activities in future, the informant/State shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of their bail bond(s). (Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U T