Arjun Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8931 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2024 Thana- SIMULTALLA District- Jamui ====================================================== Arjun Pandit S/O Bhuneshwar Pandit @ Bhuvaneshwar Pandit R/O Vill.- Fatehpur, P.S.- Simultalla, Dist.- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Murli Dhar learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Simultalla P.S. Case No. 84 of 2024 dated 23.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 110, 308(3), 308(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short 'B.N.S.').

3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner's counsel are that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 26.10.2024, he has been made accused by the informant on account of previous enmity running in between the petitioner and the informant due to a criminal case bearing Jasidih P.S. Case No. 492 of 2020 having been lodged by the petitioner against the informant of the present matter much prior to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8931 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 2/2 registration of the FIR of the present matter and no corresponding injury to the injured person namely, Titu Pandit, who is said to be the sole injured of the present matter, was found on his person and in this regard, paragraph no. 69 of the case diary may be perused. It is further submitted that against the petitioner, the investigation has been completed and there is criminal antecedent of only one case against him, in which he is on bail.

4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and mainly petitioner's custody period and the completion of investigation against him, this Court is inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Simultalla P.S. Case No. 84 of 2024.

(Shailendra Singh, J) maynaz/- U T