Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25429/2025bail granted

Sahsram Kumar @ Sahas Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25429 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2025 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Sahsram Kumar @ Sahas Pandit S/o- Hareram Pandit Resident of village - Kabirpur Tola, Kailash Nagar, P.S. - Shekhopur Sarai, District - Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard Mr. Rajnish Kumar, 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 Sheikhopur P.S. Case No. 19 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 10.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 76, 352, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the First Information Report, the informant alleged that on 10.02.2025 when she along with her son went at her land, then the petitioner along with other accused persons arrived and starting assaulting her son. Upon protest the informant sustained lathi blow on her hand.

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 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25429 of 2025(3) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against him rather the allegation levelled against them are general and omnibus.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded in paragraph-3 of the case diary in which he has stated that all the accused persons including the petitioner have assaulted to him and again in his restatement he has stated that all the petitioner along with other accused persons have assaulted him.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and the petitioner has clean antecedent, 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 C.J.M., Sheikhpura in connection with Sheikhopur P.S. Case No. 19 of 2025, 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. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25429 of 2025(3) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 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 bond 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