Surendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4621 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Surendra Singh S/o Late Ramashankar Singh @ Bhuteli Singh VillageKatalpur (Fakalpura), P.S.- Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Juli Kumari W/o Ranjan Singh R/o Village Dumri P.S. Manjhi Dist Chhapra at saran ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anand Vardhan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Umeshanand Pandit For the Informant :
Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2026 Heard Mr. Anand Vardhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 19.08.2025 in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 288 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(1), 127(1), 115(1), 118(1), 124(1), 85, 109(1), 351(3), 352, 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that informant's sister was married with accused Ranjan Singh son of this petitioner in the years 2020. After marriage, all the accused
2/4 persons started torturing the informant's sister and demanded Rs. 5 Lakh in dowry. On refusal, petitioner along with other accused persons set the informant's sister on fire by pouring kerosene oil. Thereafter, victim was brought to Patna and she was admitted in Shristi hospital. Hence the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that it appears from the FIR itself that the informant has alleged that the date of occurrence is 03.07.2025 but the FIR has been instituted on 10.08.2025 i.e., after a delay of more than one month without giving any explanation of delay. It is next submitted that from perusal of the statement of the victim which is part of the FIR suggests that there is no specific allegation rather the allegations are general and omnibus in nature against four accused persons including the petitioner and injury report of the victim also suggests that injury sustained is simple in nature. It is next submitted that the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet and petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2025.
3/4
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that the petitioner has participated in the present crime in question and number of witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and that petitioner has clean antecedent, 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 Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Gopalganj in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 288 of 2025, subject to the 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
4/4 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) Gaurav Sinha/- U T