Sudarshan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66488 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Sudarshan Ram S/o- Butan Ram Village- Lenmurha PS-Kargahar DistRohtas at Sasaram 2.

Muthun Ram @ Mithun Ram S/o- Sudarshan Ram Village- Lenmurha PSKargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 3.

Abhita Bachan @ Amitabh Bachchan @ Amitabh Ram S/o- Sudarshan Ram Village- Lenmurha PS-Kargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 4.

Pinki Devi W/o- Muthun Ram @ Mithun Ram Village- Lenmurha PSKargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 5.

Punam Devi @ Punam Kumari W/o- Abhita Bachan @ Amitabh Bachchan @ Amitab Village- Lenmurha PS-Kargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 6.

Lagarhi Devi @ Hariamuni Devi w/o- Jawahar Ram Village- Lenmurha PSKargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 7.

Akhilesh Ram @ Akhilesh Kumar S/o- Ram Prasidh Ram R/o- VillagePrandihara PS-Kargahar Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajendra Kumar Deo, Adv.

Mr. Narendra Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Akash Ambuj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to withdraw the anticipatory bail application of petitioner no. 1, Sudarshan Ram who has since been arrested.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

3. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 for the offence registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 3(5) of BNS lodged on 16.03.2025 by the informant, Jitan Ram.

2/5

4. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that on 13.03.2025, the accused persons came and assaulted the informant as also the family members. As the villagers arrived, they escaped. Later, the FIR.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that omnibus allegation is there against all the petitioners, they have no criminal antecedent and the injury report do not show any of them having received grievous injury.

6. Further, the submission is that without accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present petition in view of the fact that the informant side has alleged injuries, the petitioner nos. 2 to 7 on their own would like to jointly contribute towards the medical assistance of Rs. 5,000/- through Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank to be submitted before the 'NAZARAT' of concerned Court to be handed over to the informant after checking the credentials.

7. Learned APP for the State, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that with the common intention, the assault took place and the number of informant's side have received injuries.

8. Earlier, the Co-ordinate Bench called for the case diary which is on record and a perusal of it would show that after the first Investigating Officer, Dilip Kumar Tiwary transferred the file, the present Investigating Officer has recorded the case diary on one go

3/5 on 11.10.2025 and 18.11.2025 once he came to know about the summoning of the case diary by the Patna High Court. Worse the same has been recorded in his handwriting (instead of computer typing) and the same is unreadable.

9. Having gone through the facts of the case and the materials on record, as this Court has taken note of the fact that there is omnibus allegation, injuries have been found to be simple, the petitioners have no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to grant petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7 (Akhilesh Ram) the anticipatory bail with conditions subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- to the informant as undertaken by the learned counsel for the petitioners to be paid by Demand Draft of local branch of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank to be submitted to the Trial Court.

10. Let the petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7 (Akhilesh Ram) in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Judge-XII-cum-ACJM-IV, Sasaram, Rohtas in

4/5 connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (i) one of the bailor should be the family members/relatives of the petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7 (Akhilesh Ram), who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID) to show his bona fide; (ii) the petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7 (Akhilesh Ram) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial court itself;

(iii) the petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7 (Akhilesh Ram) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; (iv) the petitioner no. 2, (Muthun Ram), petitioner no. 3 (Abhita Bachan), petitioner no. 4 (Pinki Devi), petitioner no. 5 (Punam Devi), petitioner no. 6 (Lagarhi Devi) and petitioner no. 7

5/5 (Akhilesh Ram) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.

11. The S.P., Rohtas at Sasaram should look into the matter that still in his district, unreadable hand written case diaries are being recorded at one go. It is expected that he shall be issuing necessary instruction to all the Police Stations under his belt to ensure that henceforth, only computerized version is sent to the High Court.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T