Sintu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61198 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2020 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
Sintu Singh S/O Late Ganesh Singh R/O Vill.- Harinaha, P.S.- Jadia, District- Supaul 2.
Ravindra Kumar Singh @ Damdam Singh S/O Jay Narayan Singh R/O Vill.- Harinaha, P.S.- Jadia, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prafull Chandra Thakur, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-11-2025 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jadiya P.S. Case No.204 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegedly, while the son of the informant was engaged in fishing in a Government land, in the meanwhile, the petitioners along with one another person armed with lathi and danda came there and started assaulting him. It is specifically alleged that petitioner no.1 assaulted the son of the informant by means of lathi over his head due to which he sustained serious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61198 of 2025(3) dt.12-11-2025 2/3 injury.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that though the alleged occurrence took place on 25.10.2020, but surprisingly the FIR came to be instituted on 31.10.2020 after a delay of six days without there being any explanation. Referring to the FIR, learned Advocate for the petitioner further contended that the genesis of the occurrence is said to be some dispute pertaining to fishing in the pond and there was no criminal intent to cause injury. Since the petitioners were not even aware regarding the institution of the FIR and the police was not chasing them; hence, the delay has occurred.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State submitted that besides one criminal antecedent, there is specific allegation against petitioner no.1 of causing assault, which found to be grievous in nature.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the specific allegation against petitioner no.1 of causing grievous injury, coupled with one criminal antecedent, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for bail of petitioner no.1. Accordingly, his prayer is rejected.
7. So far petitioner no.2 is concerned, having found no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61198 of 2025(3) dt.12-11-2025 3/3 specific allegation against him, besides the delay in lodging of the FIR, let the petitioner no.2, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Supaul in connection with Jadiya P.S. Case No.204 of 2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T