← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35720/2025bail granted

Gajendra Bhushan Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2025-06-18Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 35720 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-413 Year-2024 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Gajendra Bhushan Jha S/o Lakshmi Kant Jha R/o Village- Teghra, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Teghra, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Teghra P.S. Case No. 413 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 01.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 324(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 27, 25(1-B) (a) of the Arms Act and later on Section 303(3) of the BNS and Sections 26 and 35 of Arms Acts were added added.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with other persons attacked the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

2/4 the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the informant is agnate to the petitioner and due to some previous dispute, the petitioner has been implicated in this case. He further submits that from perusal of the F.I.R it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act against this petitioner rather there is specific allegation of assault is attributed against the co-accused person, namely, Monu Kumar, who happens to be the son of the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R and he along with other co-accused persons also fired upon the informant apart from that the petitioner carries three criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, there is no specific allegation of any assault or over act against this petitioner and the informant is the agnate to the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender

3/4 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 Cheif Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Teghra P.S. Case No. 413 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 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

4/4 shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Jyoti Kumari/- U T