Karu Paswan @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1249 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2024 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Karu Paswan @ Sanjeet Kumar, S/o Ramanand Paswan R/o village- Rampur Nausahan, PS- Gangabridge, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Bela Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 06-02-2026 This the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 329(3), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 132, 125(a), 152(b), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
2/4 Substances Act, 1985.
4. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that he had been instrumental in getting the coaccused persons flee away in a case where 9.70 grams of smack were seized from the possession of the co-accused Vikky Kumar.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and no incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious possession. It has further been submitted that the quantity of seized articles belongs to intermediate quantity and therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is not applicable. It has next been submitted that co-accused person, namely, Vikky Kumar, as well as Guddu Kumar, has been enlarged on bail by a learned Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court as well as by this court in Cr. Misc. No. 12632 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 35707 of 2025 vide order dated 13.05.2025 and 28.05.2025 respectively. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 11.11.2025.
6. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
3/4
7. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative and the other shall be local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
4/4
9. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T