IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50339 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2024 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ======================================================

Santosh Bidua Son Of Gupteshwar Bidua R/O- Bhagwanpur, P.S.- Parasi, Distt.- Arwal, At Present R/O- R.P.S.Mor, North Union, P.S.- Danapur, Distt.-

Patna ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar & Anr.

... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rishikesh Ojha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 24-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Despite valid service of notice upon O.P. No. 2, nobody appears on behalf of the O.P. No. 2.

3. The present application has been filed for quashing the F.I.R being Danapur P.S. Case No. 415 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The prosecution case is to the effect that the informant has alleged that on 04.05.2024 at around 7:30 P.M. in the evening, while he was going to the Shiv Mandir for performing Puja, his brother-in-law namely, Santosh Bidua (petitioner) objected to his performing Puja and assaulted him with iron rod on his head, upon which he got grievously injured and thereafter he went to the sub-divisional hospital, Danapur, for treatment and thereafter, the FIR was lodged.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR falls in the category of vexatious prosecution on account of some personal dispute between two brothers-in- law (sala and bahnoi). It has been submitted that with regard to performing Puja, a dispute arose between two parties and it was in fact the informant of the present case who had entered the house of the petitioner along with his father and had started abusing the petitioner and his wife, to which they objected. Thereafter, it was the informant who had assaulted the petitioner with fists and legs. It has further been stated that when the son of the petitioner intervened, the father of the informant even assaulted him and when the petitioner and his wife raised hulla, the informant snatched the gold chain of the wife of the petitioner and took away the cash amount kept in the house. He further submits that for such an offence, a complaint was lodged by the petitioner’s wife on 09.05.2024, wherein she has stated that it was on account of a previous dispute between the two families, the informant of the present case along with his father had assaulted the petitioner and others. It has been submitted that for the same incident which had occurred on 04.05.2024, the informant of the present case lodged an FIR with false and fabricated medical examination reports.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that though the occurrence is said to have been committed on 04.05.2024, however, the FIR was lodged after two days of the occurrence on 06.05.2024. It has also been pointed out that though the informant has stated only about him being examined at the sub-divisional hospital Danapur, he had also prepared a medical examination report of PMCH of the same day, that is, 04.05.2024, however, from perusal of the same, which has been brought on record as Annexure-P2, the time is said to be 7:05 P.M.

7. It has further been submitted that from the perusal of the FIR, it would be evident that the time of occurrence is stated to be 7:30 P.M. on 04.05.2024, while the medical report has been prepared at 7:05 P.M. on 04.05.2024, that is prior to the occurrence. It has thus been submitted that in view of the above, a fabricated medical examination report has been prepared by the informant in order to prove his case. However, no such incident as alleged has occurred. It has next been submitted that in view of the above, the present prosecution is an abuse of pr