Priyadarshi Piyush @ Priyadarshi Piush @ Piyush Priyadarshi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2941 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- BHADAUR District- Patna ====================================================== Priyadarshi Piyush @ Priyadarshi Piush @ Piyush Priyadarshi Son of Mukesh Kumar Singh R/o Village - Khajur Korama, P.O. - Nawada Bazar, P.S. - Rajaun, Dist. - Banka(Bihar). Presently R/o Muhallah - Tripurari Enclave, Flat No. - 304, Baldev Bhawan Road Punaichak, Near P.N.B. Bank, P.S. - Sastri Nagar, Dist. - Patna.(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anand Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ajay Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard Mr.Anand Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ajay Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhadaur P.S.Case No.111 of 2025,FIR dated 31.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),115(2),109(1),324(4),352,351(2),3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith his supporters surrounded the informant and others with deadly weapons and assaulted them brutally, due to which they sustained injuries on various part of the
2/4 body.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after lodging the present FIR, another FIR has been instituted against the petitioner bearing Bhadaur P.S.Case No. 113 of 2025 under Sections 223 of BNS and Section 133 of RP Act 1951. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt-act attributed against the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner and the petitioner has been made accused in the present case due to political rivalry and petitioner was a candidate of Jan Suraj Party in the last assembly election.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or
3/4 surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 learned J.M.-Ist Class, Barh, Patna in connection with Bhadaur P.S.Case No.111 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the 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/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall
4/4 take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T