Pintu Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68650 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- SIKRAUL District- Buxar ====================================================== 1.
Pintu Choudhary S/O Vijay Choudhary R/O Village- Girdharpur, P.SSikraul, Distt. - Buxar. 2.
Dharmendra Choudhary @ Dharmendra Choudhary Sadhu @ Sadhu S/O Vijay Choudhary R/O Village- Girdharpur, P.S- Sikraul, Distt. - Buxar. 3.
Ajay Choudhary S/O Mohan Choudhary R/O Village- Girdharpur, P.SSikraul, Distt. - Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Parijat Saurav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2025 Heard Mr. Parijat Saurav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sikraul P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 08.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, a quarrel took place between the informant's daughter and her husband due to which all the accused persons including these petitioners have killed the daughter of the informant and thrown her body in the river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68650 of 2025(2) dt.26-09-2025 2/3 petitioners have not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. From perusal of the F.I.R it appears that the informant has filed the present case merely on the basis of suspicion and except the suspicion no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence. He further submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are brothers-in-law of the deceased and petitioner no. 3 is the co-villager and petitioner no. 3 is not the family member of the deceased and the husband of the deceased, namely, Manish Chaudhary is in judicial custody.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioners have clean antecedent, there is no specific allegation against the petitioners in the F.I.R and the husband of the deceased is in judicial custody, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Buxar in connection with Sikraul P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68650 of 2025(2) dt.26-09-2025 3/3 Case No. 43 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T