Ranjit Sah @ Ranjeet Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17322 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2024 Thana- PURNAHYA District- Sheohar ====================================================== Ranjit Sah @ Ranjeet Kumar Sah Son of Late Ram Chandra Sah Resident of Dostiya Utri, P.S.- Purnahiya, District - Sheohar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025 Heard Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Bharat Lal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 08.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons arrived at the house of the informant armed with dangerous weapons and started abusing him. The petitioner is said to have assaulted the brother of the informant with knife. It is further alleged that accused persons has taken away gold chain worth Rs.65,000/- from the neck of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17322 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/3 the informant and Rs.15,000/- cash was stolen by them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the as per FIR, the specific allegation against the petitioner is that he has assaulted the Arun Sah, who is happened to be the brother of the informant. It is further submitted that although, Arun Sah has received injuries but injury report of the Arun Sah suggest that all the injuries are found to be simple in nature.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, clean antecedent of the petitioner and the fact that injuries of the injured person are found to be simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of 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 the learned S.D.J.M., Sheohar in connection with Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17322 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 3/3 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his 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 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) priyanka/- U T