← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20000/2025bail granted

Satya Narayan Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-30Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20000 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2024 Thana- JANKINAGAR District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.

Satya Narayan Thakur S/O Late Assraf Thakur @ Asarfi Thakur 2.

Manoj Thakur S/O Satya Narayan Thakur 3.

Chhotu Thakur S/O Satya Narayan Thakur All R/O Vill.- Damgara, Ward no. 8, P.S.- Dhamdaha, Dist.- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amardeep, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jai Narain Thakur,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-07-2025 Heard Mr.Amardeep, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jankinagar P.S.Case No.463 of 2024, FIR dated 18.12.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1),3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. Allegation against the petitioners is that they alongwith co-accused persons murdered the informant's mother Lalita Devi due to land dispute.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated.

2/4 Although the petitioners are named in the FIR but it appears from the FIR itself that the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and there is land dispute between the informant and the petitioners' side so informant has falsely implicated the petitioners in the present case. In fact it appears from the FIR itself that the Panchayati was held on 15.12.2024 for redressal of the dispute between the parties with regard to the land dispute in question but the same was not sort out by the Panchayat level. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact the mother of the informant had died naturally and he has placed the postmortem report which suggests that no internal or external injury was found on the person of the deceased.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners but fairly submits that no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioners to suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence. Further submits that the petitioners carry two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that out of two cases, the petitioners are on bail in one case and rest one case is pending for consideration, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and no other cogent

3/4 material has come during investigation against the petitioners to suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with Jankinagar P.S.Case No.

463 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the BNSS,2023 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 bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioners tamper 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

4/4 any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for 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) Nitesh/- U T