← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31849/2025bail granted

Sujeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-20Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31849 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2024 Thana- CHERIYA BARIYARPUR DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Sujeet Kumar Son of Ramesh Mishra R/o Vill.- Aakopur, P.S.- Cheriyabariyarpur, Dist.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anish Chandra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-05-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Cheriyabariyarpur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. & 27 of the Arms Act. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that three persons namely, Deoki Nandan Bharti, Sujeet Kumar (petitioner) and Dault Kumar came to his house on motorcycle and thereafter it is alleged that Deoki Nandan Bharti fired upon his daughter hitting her on her abdomen and thereafter Sujit Kumar (petitioner) is also alleged to have fired, however, the

2/4 said shot did not hit her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated on account of a land dispute between the family of the petitioner and the family of the informant and for which a title suit is also pending. The learned counsel has further submitted that specific allegation of firing upon the daughter of the informant is upon co-accused Deoki Nandan Bharti. The counsel for the petitioner has stated that barring the allegation of firing upon the daughter of the informant which did not hit the daughter of the informant, there is nothing against the petitioner to connect with present incident. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that chargesheet has already been submitted. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has one criminal case against his name and in the present case he is in custody since 04.02.2025.

5. The learned A.P.P for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that there is an allegation of firing against the petitioner, upon the daughter of the informant.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and taking account that the specific overt act of firing upon the daughter of the informant being on co-accused

3/4 Deokinandan Bharti, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.

8. Let the petitioner, above named, 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 court of learned A.C.J.M., Manjhaul (Begusarai), in connection with Cheriyabariyarpur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail and if the prosecution is found involvement of the petitioner in similar nature of offence, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

(iv) 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

4/4 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.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T