Dharmedra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39127 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2025 Thana- RAJPUR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Dharmedra Sharma, Son of Late Suresh Sharma, Resident of Village- Garura Police Station -Agrer, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that on 11.12.2025 the informant's father passed away at the Government hospital. However, later on, it transpired that on 10.12.2025, the petitioner along with others taken away the informant's father by attending a wedding ceremony from where his father disclosed on telephone that he was physically assaulted, subsequently the accused persons crushed his father to death by running over a tempo.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39127 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3 petitioner is non-else, but the maternal uncle of the informant and only on account of some family feud and partition, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in the present case in order to extort some money. The alleged occurrence took place on 10.12.2025 and the present F.I.R. came to be instituted on 17.12.2025, without there being any explanation of delay. The entire prosecution case falls to the ground for the simple reason that in course of post-mortem it has come that the deceased died on account of the accident. The informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence, but only in order to mount pressure and extort money, the present FIR came to be instituted.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the name of the petitioner transpired later on, who found involved in causing death of the father of the informant and moreover, the petitioner also bears one criminal antecedent, though he has been acquitted by the order/judgment of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence and save and except the suspicion, there is no other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39127 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3 materials collected during the course of investigation, besides the delay in lodging of the F.I.R. as well as fair antecedent, let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close relative of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) uday/siddharthU T