Nitish Kumar @ Bhandul @ Mundul v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39943 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2026 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== Nitish Kumar @ Bhandul @ Mundul S/O Arvind Kumar Mehta @ Arvind Mahato R/O Village- Mahadiganj, P.S- Sasaram (Muffasil), Dist.- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2026 Heard Mr.Babu Nandan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 10.04.2026 in connection with Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 26.01.2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 303(2), 109, 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. As per FIR, all the accused persons surrounded and assaulted the informant, Ajit Mahto attacked the informant's face and head with an iron fighter punch held him his hand causing serious injury to the informant's face and dye.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39943 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 2/3 Initially the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation. Further submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against co-accused person, namely, Ajit Mahto, who has assaulted the informant by means of iron fighter punch and he has received the injury. It appears from the FIR that the present occurrence has taken place due to non-payment of the money in question and the petitioner is in custody since 10.04.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has participated in the present crime in question and apart from that, the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39943 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026 3/3 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T