Surendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58120 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2025 Thana- NIMCHAKBATHANI District- Gaya ====================================================== Surendra Ram S/o Doman Ram R/o Village- Baraini, P.S.- Nimchak Bathani in the district of Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-11-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(2), 329(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons came and petitioner along with Ajit Kumar assaulted his mother, namely, Mano Devi by rod and Chapra respectively causing injury on her head and thereafter the accused persons threatened them and said to leave the village.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to land. It is further submitted that informant and his side are trying to grab the land of the petitioner by deceitful means. It is next submitted that no doubt,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58120 of 2025(3) dt.07-11-2025 2/2 petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the mother of the informant along with Ajit Kumar but then petitioner is not a criminal and is in custody since 04.05.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted. It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending in connection with Nimchak Bathani P.S. Case No. 13 of 2025.
7. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after his release on bail, is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial of the case in any manner, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T