Nitish Kumar @ Ledhiya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13381 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== Nitish Kumar @ Ledhiya Son of Budhu Ray @ Buddu Ray Resident of village - Ganjpar Athmalgola, P.S.- Athmalgola, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate Ms. Kumari Pallavi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Athmalgola P.S. Case no.411 of 2025 registered under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109(1), 324(4) and 303(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, on information having been received about the persons being involved in sale and purchase of liquor, it is stated that a raid was conducted. While others managed to escape, two persons including one Mukesh Kumar was arrested. However on an attempt by the police to test Mukesh Kumar with the Breath Analyzer machine, it is stated that he as also a large number of other persons started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13381 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3 creating disturbance, pelting stones, thus damaging police vehicles and causing injuries. It is further stated that on enquiry and secret information, the name of 14 accused persons mentioned in the FIR transpired as also there were 10-15 unknown accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case in course of investigation as being amongst the 10-15 unknown accused persons mentioned in the FIR. He was neither anywhere near the place of occurrence nor involved in the same. A number of co-accused have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 4.2.2026 (Annexure-P/2). The petitioner is in custody since 14.11.2025 and chargesheet have been submitted in the case. He has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner not being named therein, the material that has transpired in course of investigation as is evident from the order of the learned trial Court, grant of bail to the co-accused vide aforesaid order dated 4.2.2026 together with the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13381 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3 having remained in custody since 14.11.2025 and chargesheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Athmalgola P.S. Case no.411 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh, District-Patna.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T