Dharmendra Kumar @ Taklu @ Dharmendra Taklu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39515 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2026 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== 1.
Dharmendra Kumar @ Taklu @ Dharmendra taklu S/O Naresh Paswan R/O Mohalla- Katariya, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Munger. 2.
Amit Kumar S/O Charitra Paswan @ Ram Charitra Paswan R/O MohallaKali Mandir, Naya Tola, Katariya, Dariapur, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surya Narayan Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-07-2026 Heard Mr. Surya Narayan Sah, counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Bharat Lal, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.113 of 2026, dated 05.03.2026, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 125(A), 125(B), 324(5), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 223, 121(1), 121(2), 109(1), 132, 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the prosecution case as disclosed in the FIR, the 17-18 persons were found dancing in an intoxicated state and disturbing public peace. It is alleged that when the police intervened and restrained them from doing so, they became aggressive and started pelting stones at the police party, thereby a large unlawful assembly of about 100-150 persons gathered and attacked on the police force with bricks and stones with an intention to cause serious injuries, as a result of which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39515 of 2026(3) dt.28-07-2026 2/3 the informant and other police personnel sustained injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of local villagers. It is further submitted that there are altogether 24 named accused persons and about 100-150 unnamed persons who have been made accused in the present case. Learned counsel submits that nothing specific has surfaced against these petitioners during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioners are shopkeepers by profession and are running kirana shops in the village. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner no.1 has no criminal antecedents and petitioner no.2 has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners. However, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that no material has surfaced during the course of investigation indicating the complicity of these petitioners has not been refuted by the learned APP.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners and the allegations against them are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39515 of 2026(3) dt.28-07-2026 3/3 general and omnibus in nature, let the above-named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger/Successor Court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.113 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/ known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document/ personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J) shikha/- U T