Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8280 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2024 Thana- BACHHWARA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Suraj Kumar S/o Kari Paswan R/o Village- Chamtha, Balupar, Ward no 12, Police station- Bachhwara, District- Begusarai 2.
Rohit Kumar S/o Kari Paswan R/o Village- Chamtha, Balupar, Ward no 12, Police station- Bachhwara, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prerna Anand, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Bachhwara P.S. Case No.354/2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(2), 127(1), 109, 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The Investigating Officer of the case, in compliance of the order dated 23.04.2026 is present in the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent, on which, the learned APP after perusing the case diary, submits that petitioner no.1 has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8280 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026 2/3 antecedent of two cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of one case. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific allegation of stabbing the victim is against Rohit and petitioner no.1 is alleged to have snatched the golden chain of the victim, who fell on account of stabbing by Rohit. It is thus submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then petitioner no.1 is not alleged to have stabbed the victim. It is also submitted that petitioners are in custody since 30.10.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that informant is father of the victim and he has specifically alleged that Rohit and petitioner no.1 were present at the place of occurrence and Rohit stabbed the victim while petitioner no.1 snatched his chain. It is further submitted that from perusal of the injury report, it would manifest that the same records -the injury to be grievous caused by sharp edged weapon (knife). It is also submitted that petitioner no.1 may not have stabbed the victim but then his presence at the place of occurrence emboldened Rohit to commit the occurrence of stabbing. It is also submitted that petitioners have not approached the court with clean hands.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8280 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026 3/3
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioners on bail.
7. The regular bail application of the petitioners is rejected.
8. The personal appearance of the Investigating Officer of the case is dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T