Sita Ram Mandal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6669 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- PRANPUR District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.
Sita Ram Mandal S/o Late Santlal Mandal R/o Marocha, PS- Pranpur, DisttKatihar 2.
Pinku Mandal @ Pintu Mandal @ Pintu Kumar S/o Sita Ram Mandal R/o Marocha, PS- Pranpur, Distt- Katihar ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate :
Mr. Indrajeet Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seek bail who is in custody since 13.11.2025 in connection with Pranpur P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354(B), 384, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC.
3. That the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.01.2024 when the husband of the informant was talking with his sister at the door, all the named accused persons came there and started to assault, one Pintu Kumar assaulted to her husband Dipak Kumar by the sword on his head for which he got injured,
2/4 one Lalit Mandal @ Lalit Kumar assaulted to her sister in law Archana Devi on head by the Farsa due to which she sustained injury. It is next alleged that Puja Kumari and Kiran Devi snatched ear ring of Rs. 60,000/- from her sister in law.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier the petitioners have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 31.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35475 of 2024. Thereafter, the petitioners moved before the Court for modifying the order dated 31.07.2024 but the same was dismissed by order dated 18.07.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned court below has accepted the bail bonds of the petitioners on 24.08.2024, thereafter, petitioners have been taken in custody on 13.11.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to communication gap, the correct criminal antecedents of the petitioners have not been furnished in Cr. Misc. No. 35475 of 2024 and the petitioners are in custody since 13.11.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submit that it appears from the aforesaid that petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents and petitioners have antecedent of four
3/4 cases other than the present case but fairly submit that out of four cases, petitioners have been acquitted in two cases and two cases are pending for consideration before the Court of competent law.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances , let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of CJM, Katihar in connection with Pranpur P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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