Sohram Nat v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11105 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2024 Thana- KOPA District- Saran ====================================================== Sohram Nat Son of Chitragun Nat @ Chuturgan Nat R/o Village -Daudpur P.S. -Daudpur District -Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Pushpa Sinha.1, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of B.N.S. and 25(1-B(a), 26,35 of Arms Act. Petitioner has four criminal antecedents.
3. As per the prosecution case, the police on a tip off that some miscreants have assembled in an orchard, conducted a raid and apprehended five accused persons and on search one knife was recovered from the possession of the co-accused person while one country-made pistol with loaded cartridge and a motorcycle was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11105 of 2025(4) dt.18-06-2025 2/3
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and no such recovery as stated has been made from his conscious possession as five persons were assembled there. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had only been implicated because he carries four criminal antecedents against his name. The learned counsel lastly submits that he is in custody since 24.11.2024
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the petitioner has antecedent which itself speaks about his conduct.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and taking into account the period of custody, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. 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 court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection Kopa P.S. Case No. 211 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11105 of 2025(4) dt.18-06-2025 3/3 (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative and the other shall be local resident. (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned. (iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T