Sunder Pasi @ Sunder Ram @ Surendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40463 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2024 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Sunder Pasi @ Sunder Ram @ Surendra Ram Son of Shri Bhagwan Pasi Resident of Village - Tendua, P.S.- Darigaon, District - Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate Mr. Md. Fazle Karim, Advocate Mr. Faizan Ahmad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Chenari P.S. Case no.298 of 2024, registered under sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the petitioner and one Manoj Pasi along with others took the informant's son-in-law, killed him and thereafter brought his body to his place on 2.9.2024 at 8 p.m. They said that he was alive but he had died. The informant further states that after postmortem examination and cremation, he had come and registered the case on 6.9.2024.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40463 of 2025(3) dt.08-10-2025 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The actual cause of death of the son-in-law of the informant was his having consumed country liquor. While the occurrence is alleged to have taken place in the evening of 2.9.2024, though the postmortem took place on 3.9.2024, there is no explanation whatsoever as to why information was given to the police only on 6.9.2024 whereafter the FIR was registered. It is further submitted that it has also transpired in course of investigation that one of the accused had taken the son-in-law of the informant to the hospital. There is no reason for the petitioner to have committed the crime as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R together with the material that has transpired in course of investigation and especially the FIR having been registered on 6.9.2024 though the occurrence is said to have taken place on 2.9.2024 and the postmortem examination conducted in the morning of 3.9.2024, in the facts of the case, it is directed that the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40463 of 2025(3) dt.08-10-2025 3/3 surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Chenari P.S. Case no.298 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas, Sasaram.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T