Rajendra Sao v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39987 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-480 Year-2025 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== Rajendra Sao Son of Late Chotu Sao Resident of Village- Lalpur, P.S.- Kowakol in the District of Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rak Prakash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 27-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 183 of 2026, arising out of Kowakol P.S. Case No. 480 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 329(3), 324(4)(5), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 103(1), 61(2) of BNS.
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and other co-accused persons started breaking the boundary wall of the informant. They also damaged the asbestos roof of the house of the cousin of the informant. They were armed with khanti,
2/4 spade, tangi and sword. When their act was opposed by the informant, his cousin and the wife of his cousin, they brutally assaulted them causing a number of injuries and the cousin of the informant died while being taken to the hospital.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and it was a free fight between the parties in the background of land dispute. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner for causing any injury on Lakhan Saw, who has died. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted the informant with Tangi but the injury report falsifies the allegation. No injury of any sharp or heavy cutting weapon has been found on the informant and the injury report shows three lacerated wounds on right temporal part of the head, right occipital part of the head and also on the right leg. But these injuries have been caused by hard and blunt object though the injuries are stated to be grievous. The specific allegation of assault upon the cousin brother of the informant is against co-accused Umesh Sao. Learned counsel further submits that other co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail as well as regular bail by this Court and other Co-ordinate Bench. The petitioner is having clean antecedent
3/4 and he is in custody since 02.12.2025. Charge sheet has been submitted.
05. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted the informant with Tangi on his head and the injuries on the head have been observed.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the absence of injury by any sharp weapon on the informant for which there is allegation against the petitioner and also considering the period of custody of the petitioner, his clean antecedent and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Nawada/concerned Court in connection with Sessions Trial No. 183 of 2026, arising out of Kowakol P.S. Case No. 480 of 2025, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions : (i) One of the bailors will be a close
4/4 relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T