← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18207/2025bail granted

Nitish Sada v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-02Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18207 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2024 Thana- NADI District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Nitish Sada son of Bahadur Sada Village -Kadmaha, Ward no. 04, PsSupaul, Nadi, Dist- Supaul 2.

Santosh Sada Son of Bahadur Sada Village -Kadmaha, Ward no. 04, PsSupaul, Nadi, Dist- Supaul 3.

Satrohan Sada @ Satrudhan Sada Son of Jitan Sada Village -Kadmaha, Ward no. 04, Ps- Supaul, Nadi, Dist- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Pratibha Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard Ms. Pratibha Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 50 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 08.06.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that when she asked the petitioners that why they assaulted her son, the petitioners along with other accused

2/4 persons assaulted the informant by means of lathi, danda, iron rod and when her husband came to rescue, they assaulted him also. It is further alleged that petitioner nos.2 & 3 snatched Rs.60,000/- from the informant and ornaments worth Rs.40,000/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. Although the petitioners are named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including these petitioners and apart from that the present occurrence took place on 07.06.2024 at 12:00 noon and FIR instituted on 08.06.2024 at 10:30 P.M i.e. after delay of 36 hours and it transpires from the FIR that due to drainage dispute the present occurrence has taken place.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioners have clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation of assault against the petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court

3/4 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Supaul in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 50 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. 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 bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the

4/4 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) Suruchi/- U T