Indradeo Rajbanshi @ Inderdev Rajvanshi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53154 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2025 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== Indradeo Rajbanshi @ Inderdev Rajvanshi S/o Late Hira Rajbanshi, Resident of Village- Paratapur, P.S.- Sirdala, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Deo Raj, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 115 of 2025 dated-25.03.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 308(5), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. As per allegation, the informant was robbed of his motorcycle, cash of Rs.20,000/-, ATM Card and Driving Licence by four persons and some others by putting gamchha around his neck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
2/4 case. He further submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case, in view of the fact that he is a witness in a criminal case bearing Nawada SC/ST P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025, in which business partner of the informant is an accused. He further submits that no case property has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, though some property has been recovered from co-accused, namely, Guddu Rajwanshi and Rakesh Kumar, who have already been enlarged on regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 45846 of 2025.
5. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 26.05.2025.
6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.
8. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-
3/4 named, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court below in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 115 of 2025, on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required. (iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
4/4 below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Jitendra Kumar, J.) ravishankar/- U T