Kundan Pandit @ Kundan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40864 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-497 Year-2024 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
Kundan Pandit @ Kundan Kumar, Male, aged about 28 years, Son of Naresh Pandit @ Bitay Pandit 2.
Rajan Pandit @ Rajan Kumar, Male, aged about 26 years, son of Naresh Pandit @ Bitay Pandit 3.
Sajan Pandit @ Sanjay Kumar, Male, aged about 24 years, son of Naresh Pandit @ Bitay Pandit 4.
Ranjeet Pandit @ Ranjeet Kumar, Male, aged about 22 years, son of Naresh Pandit @ Bitay Pandit All are resident of Village- Patori Kumhar Tola, Ward No.14, PS -Sigheshwar Dist -Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Rabindra Kumar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 497 of 2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the accused persons named therein including the petitioners have assaulted the informant and his family members.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40864 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. General and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners. There is admitted land dispute between the parties and due to said land dispute, an altercation took place and both the sides entered into fierce fight and in the self-defence, petitioners may have caused some injury on the persons of the informant's side. Petitioners no.1 and 2 have clean antecedent, whereas petitioner no.3 has one criminal antecedent, in which he is on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioners in the FIR, as well as, the fact that due to land dispute, an altercation took place and both the sides entered into fierce fight and in the self-defence, petitioners may have caused some injury on the persons of the informant's side and also the fact that general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners, I am of the opinion that petitioners have, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40864 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four 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 learned C.J.M., Madhepura in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 497 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T