Akhilesh Kumar @ Prashant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58549 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- Dehri Mufassil District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Akhilesh Kumar @ Prashant Kumar S/O Late Bhaiyaram Singh R/O Village- Mahadeva, P.O.- Jamuhar, P.S.- Dehri (M), Distt.- Rohtas. 2.
Meena Devi W/O Akhilesh Kumar @ Prashant Kumar R/O VillageMahadeva, P.O.- Jamuhar, P.S.- Dehri (M), Distt.- Rohtas. 3.
Panpato Devi W/O Late Bhaiyaram Singh R/O Village- Mahadeva, P.O.- Jamuhar, P.S.- Dehri (M), Distt.- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Dehri (M) P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that the accused persons took away cash as well as Mangal Sutra and when she objected they started fleeing away. She caught waist of one of the accused persons. It is further
2/4 alleged that petitioners Akhilesh Kumar and Meena Devi caught hair of the informant and started assaulting her and even snatched away her locket.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have falsely been implicated as there is a dispute between the families being agnates/Gotiyas. It is further submitted that for the same incident counter case was also lodged on behalf of the petitioners and so far as the injuries are concerned they were found to be simple in nature.
5. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has one criminal case against his name for the offence under Excise Act while the petitioners no. 2 and 3 have no criminal antecedents.
6. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
7. Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
3/4 Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Dehri (M) P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 as well as subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners;
(ii) the petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court;
(iii) in case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned; (iv) the Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners except in Dehri (M) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2022 (against petitioner no. 1), registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and, in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above mentioned order shall not be delayed for the purpose of the same or in the name of verification.
4/4 (v) the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigating agency, failing which the bail bond of the petitioners shall liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) krishna/- U T