Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14832 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-444 Year-2025 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Kumar S/O Jagnarayan Singh R/O Vill.- Lodipur, P.S.- Rafiganj, Dist.- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No.444 of 2025, dated 23.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 329(3) and 3(5) of BNS.
3. According to prosecution case, while the informant was poughing his filed, then petitioner and his father came and assaulted to him by means of lathi due to which the hand of the informant was fractured.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14832 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/3 fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The present case is counter blast of Rafiganj P.S.Case No.443 of 2025. From a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the date of occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 21.10.2025 but the present FIR has been instituted on 23.10.2025 after delay of two days without giving any explanation of delay afterthought only to falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case. There is admitted land dispute between the parties and one Partition Suit No. 246 of 2018 is pending between the parties.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in both the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14832 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 3/3 No.444 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner 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 his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner 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 petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T