Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60426 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2025 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== 1.
Santosh Kumar S/o Siyasharan Yadav R/o Village - Budhauli, P.S - Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura 2.
Satish Yadav @ Satish Kumar S/o Siya Sharan Yadav R/o Village - Budhauli, P.S - Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura 3.
Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar S/o Basdev Yadav @ Vasudev Yadav R/o Village - Budhauli, P.S - Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura 4.
Basdev Yadav @ Vasudev Yadav S/o Late Tilak Yadav R/o Village - Budhauli, P.S - Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura 5.
Manohar Yadav S/o Basdev Yadav @ Vasudev Yadav R/o Village - Budhauli, P.S - Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 201/2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 132, 324(4), 125A, 352 of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioners, along with other co-accused, obstructed government
2/4 officials in the lawful execution of the decree passed by the competent Court having jurisdiction, during which police officials got injured.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that, except for the allegation that the petitioners lay down in front of the JCB, there are no other allegations against them, nor have they assaulted any police officials. However, he admitted that the petitioners can at best be said to be members of an unlawful assembly which created hindrance in the lawful execution of the decree passed by the competent court having jurisdiction. The petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, the petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail and submitted that the petitioners are members of the unlawful assembly which created hindrance in lawful execution of the decree passed by the competent Court having jurisdiction in which the police officials got injured while they were performing their duty and as such, the petitioners don't deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
3/4 behalf of the parties, as well, having perused the allegation made in the FIR, I find that the allegation against the peititoner no.5 is serious in nature and he had also obstructed the police force while they were performing their duty, in which police officials got injured, and, as such, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner no.5 on pre-arrest bail.
7. So far as, the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 are concerned in view of no specific allegation against them, the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 4, above named, are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending / Concerned Court in connection with Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 201/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 and if it is found that the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will
4/4 automatically lose its force.
9. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U T