Dinesh Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4289 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- Baijnathpur District- Saharsa ====================================================== Dinesh Das S/O Makum Das R/O Village- Barahi, Ward No. 14, P.S.- Baijnathpur, District- Saharsa, BIHAR.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhav Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2026 Heard Mr. Madhav Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 01.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109, 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2)(3), 3(5) of the BNS.

3. According to prosecution case, on 24.05.2025, all the accused persons including the petitioner armed with lathi and rod assaulted the informant and her family members and demanded Rs. 2 lacs. Allegation against the petitioners is that he gave iron rod blow causing head injury to the son of the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4289 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R., that due to some land dispute the present occurrence took place. Although, there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted son of the informant but the doctor has opined that the son of the informant has received injury which is simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance and there is case and counter case between the parties.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent and the injury caused by the petitioner is simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or 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 the learned J.M., 1st Class, Saharsa, in connection with Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4289 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026 3/3 482(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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his 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 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 above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) khushbu/- U