Musai Soren v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14949 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-335 Year-2025 Thana- BAHADURGANJ District- Kishanganj ====================================================== 1.

Musai Soren S/O Late Dhuma Soren R/O Village- Jay Nagar Dubadangi, ward no. 03, P.S.- Bahadurganj, Dist.- Kishanganj. 2.

Ram Soren S/O Musai Soren R/O Village- Jay Nagar Dubadangi, ward no. 03, P.S.- Bahadurganj, Dist.- Kishanganj.

3.

Bablu Murmu S/O Simal Murmu R/O Village- Jay Nagar Dubadangi, ward no. 03, P.S.- Bahadurganj, Dist.- Kishanganj. 4.

Sukhlal Soren @ Suklal Soren S/O Sunnil Lal Soren @ Chuni Lal Soren R/O Village- Jay Nagar Dubadangi, ward no. 03, P.S.- Bahadurganj, Dist.- Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-03-2026 Heard Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioners seek bail, who are in custody since 29.07.2025, in connection with Bahadurganj P.S. Case No. 335 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 29.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(1), 190, 126(2), 127(1), 103(1) of B.N.S.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that they along with other accused persons have assaulted the husband of the

2/4 informant, namely, Sabbir Alam, due to which he sustained injuries and during course of treatment he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have clean antecedents and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It appears from the F.I.R. itself that informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and she has filed the present F.I.R. on the basis of information furnished by the other person. From perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against these petitioners rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including these petitioners. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioners and the petitioners are in custody since 29.07.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and they have participated in the present crime in question.

3/4

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioners having clean antecedents and there is no specific allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R., let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Kishanganj in connection with Bahadurganj P.S. Case No. 335 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) 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 bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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 antecedents, 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) Ibrar//- U T