Lalbabu Sah @ Lallu Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44104 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-420 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Lalbabu Sah @ Lallu Sah s/o Late Chandarma Sah resident of village - kalyani, police station - suryapura, district- rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2026 Heard Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 30.04.2026 in connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No. 420 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(1), 190, 109, 352, 351(2), 118(1) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along with other accused persons have assaulted the brother of the informant due to which he sustained head injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from FIR that over a

2/4 petty dispute regarding irrigation of the field in question, the present occurrence has taken place. There is case and counter case between the parties. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted to Manoj Pandey by means of iron rod due to which he received injury which is grievous in nature but he also submits that in the present occurrence, petitioner has also received grievous injury and due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence has taken place. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. He further submits that similarly situated, co-accused, namely, Birendra Shah and others have been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18387 of 2026 and another co-accused, namely, Navrangi Sah @ Naurangi Sah has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 31.03.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19504 of 2026. The petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2026.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent, there is case and counter case between the parties, petitioner has also received injuries in

3/4 the said incident and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted regular as well as anticipatory bail by this Court and by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No. 420 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his 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

4/4 shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T