KUMHA SINGH vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22700 of 2019
CNR No. BRHC010315002019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2011 Thana- TEYAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
1. KUMHA SINGH, Son of Sarla Singh, Resident of Village-Hetampur, P.S.-
Tiar, District-Bhojpur.
2. Munna Singh Son of Bhuli Singh Resident of Village-Hetampur, P.S.-Tiar,
District-Bhojpur.
3. Rajendra Singh Son of Yamuna Singh Resident of Village-Hetampur, P.S.-
Tiar, District-Bhojpur.
4. Surendra Singh Son of Suraj Singh Resident of Village-Hetampur, P.S.-Tiar,
District-Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ram Ajay Pal Singh, Son of Ram Naresh Singh, Resident of Village-
Andharibag, P.S-Tiyar, District-Bhojpur.
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-10-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present petition has been filed by the
petitioners for quashing the order dated 17.07.2018 passed
in Session Trial No. 87/2014 arising out of Teyar P.S. Case
No. 11 of 2011 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-
th
4 , Bhojpur at Ara.
3. Brief facts of the case is that as per FIR, while the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22700 of 2019 dt.27-10-2026
2/4
informant was doing voting campaign for his wife, who was
contesting as a candidate of Mukhiya election and so when
he was standing near Betel shop alongwith other persons, in
the meantime, Surendra Singh (petitioner), Munna Singh
(petitioner), Rajendra Singh (petitioner), Gauri Shankar
Singh, Umesh Singh and Kumha Singh (petitioner) came
there alongwith 12-14 persons armed with iron-rod and lathi
and abused him and tried to stop the voting campaign. It is
further alleged that Surendra Singh assaulted by iron rod on
the head of the informant, due to which he sustained head
injury and Gauri Shankar Singh snatched golden chain from
the neck of the informant and thereafter, other accused
persons assaulted the informant by fists and slaps. It is
alleged that the cause of occurrence was that the wife of
informant and wife of one Manji Singh @ Dara Singh, both
were the candidate and contested in the election of Mukhiya
and the accused persons threatened the informant to
withdraw the candiature of his wife.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submitted that upon medical examination no grievous injury

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22700 of 2019 dt.27-10-2026
3/4
was found upon the informant/injured and, therefore, no
case under section 307 of the I.P.C. is made out. It is also
pointed out that allegation of making assault by using iron
rod is specifically available against co-accused Surendra
Singh, and hence rejection of discharge petition is bad in the
eyes of law.
5. Upon perusal of record and considering the
submission as canvassed by the parties, it transpires that
learned counsel for the petitioners without disputing the
occurrence, submitted that the case is groundless against the
petitioners, for the reason that nature of injury was not
grievous and it was specifically available against one of the
co-accused persons namely, Surendra Singh and other
persons namely, Munna Singh, Rajendra Singh, Gauri
Shankar Singh and Umesh Singh seems to be implicated in
the FIR with the aid of Section 149 of the I.P.C. is very
genral and omnibus manner.
6. As per settled principles, grave suspicion is
sufficient to frame the charges against the accused persons.
In the present case, accused persons are named in the FIR

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22700 of 2019 dt.27-10-2026
4/4
and their active involvement was supported by the
informant/injured causing him head injury during the
occurrence by one of the co-accused. Charge-sheet was
submitted against them, whereafter learned jurisdictional
Magistrate took cognizance for the offences.
7. Considering all such material, there is no occasion
to interfere with the impugned order 17.07.2018 passed in
Session Trial No. 87/2014 arising out of Teyar P.S. Case No.
11 of 2011.
8. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed.
9. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the learned
trial court forthwith.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Rajeev/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27.10.2026
Transmission Date 27.10.2026