Futani Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43695 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Futani Singh Son of Late Ram Briksh Singh Resident of Village - Bargaon, Police Station - Sirdalla, District - Nawada. 2.
Sadan Singh @ Sadanand Singh Son of Late Ram Briksh Singh Resident of Village - Bargaon, Police Station - Sirdalla, District - Nawada. 3.
Saroj Devi @ Sarojini Devi Wife of Sadan Singh @ Sadanand Singh Resident of Village - Bargaon, Police Station - Sirdalla, District - Nawada. 4.
Sadhna Devi Wife of Futani Singh Resident of Village - Bargaon, Police Station - Sirdalla, District - Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ram Vinay Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh, Advocate :
Mr. Bijay Kumar Pathak, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 Heard Mr. Ram Vinay Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sirdalla P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.03.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 76, 109, 303(2), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43695 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/3 alleged that when he was working at his land then the petitioners along with other accused persons came and assaulted him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence has taken place and the present case is counter blast of Sirdalla P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025 lodged by petitioner no.4 against the son and other family members of the present informant. Although the petitioners are named in the FIR but there is no specific allegation against them and during scuffle some of the persons have received injury but the injury report of the injured persons suggest the injury inflicted upon them is simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioners have clean antecedent and there is case and counter case and injury inflicted upon injured persons is simple in nature let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43695 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 3/3 Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Sirdalla P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Suruchi/- U T