← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68156/2025bail granted

Kanhaiya Sharma @ Kanhaiya @ Ramkrishna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-12-02Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma8 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67815 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Raja Kumar @ Raja Sharma S/O Prakash Sharma R/o Village- Simrahi Nagar Panchayat Ward No.03, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Supaul 2.

Raju Kumar @ Raju Sharma S/O Prakash Sharma R/o Village- Simrahi Nagar Panchayat Ward No.03, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68156 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Kanhaiya Sharma @ Kanhaiya @ Ramkrishna Kumar S/O Late Narayan Sharma Resident of village - Simrahi Bazar (Simrahi Nagar Panchayat), Ward No. 03, Police Station - Raghopur, District - Supaul 2.

Dev Sharma @ Dev Kumar S/O Lalu Sharma @ Lal Sharma @ Lalo Sharma Resident of village - Simrahi Bazar (Simrahi Nagar Panchayat), Ward No. 03, Police Station - Raghopur, District - Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68652 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Dileep Kumar @ Dileep Sutihar S/O Sitaram Sutihar Resident of VillageSimrahi, Ward No. 03, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 67815 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhuweneswar Sahu For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Asha Devi

2/8 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68156 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun .

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68652 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kamal Kishore Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-12-2025 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67815 of 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 74, 79 of the B.N.S.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and in sum and substance the informant alleges that on account of an allegation that his son had committed theft, the accused persons including the petitioners along with unknown accused assaulted him brutally. Accordingly, the police was informed and when the police reached, the police saved her son along with daughter inlaw Meena Devi, who was made captive by the mob.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

3/8 allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners assaulted her son Basant Das brutally causing injury, but then, the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple. It is submitted that had so many accused assaulted the son of the informant, in that event, he would have suffered multiple injuries, but then, that is not the case. It is also submitted that from perusal of Annexure-2 to Cr. Misc. No.68652 of 2025 (Dileep Kumar @ Dileep Sutihar vs. the State of Bihar), it would manifest that the injury report is annexed opining the injury to be simple. It is further submitted that there is a delay of three days in instituting the FIR as the date of occurrence is 17.06.2025 and the FIR based on written application was submitted on 20.06.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the

4/8 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Raghopur P. S. Case No.227 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. The application stands allowed.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68156 of 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 74, 79 of the B.N.S.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and in sum and substance the informant alleges that on account of an allegation that his son had committed theft, the accused persons including the petitioners along with unknown accused assaulted him brutally. Accordingly, the police was informed and when the police reached, the police saved her son along with daughter inlaw Meena Devi, who was made captive by the mob.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by

5/8 the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners assaulted her son Basant Das brutally causing injury, but then, the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple. It is submitted that had so many accused assaulted the son of the informant, in that event, he would have suffered multiple injuries, but then, that is not the case. It is also submitted that from perusal of Annexure-2 to Cr. Misc. No.68652 of 2025 (Dileep Kumar @ Dileep Sutihar vs. the State of Bihar), it would manifest that the injury report is annexed opining the injury to be simple. It is further submitted that there is a delay of three days in instituting the FIR as the date of occurrence is 17.06.2025 and the FIR based on written application was submitted on 20.06.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.

6/8 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Raghopur P. S. Case No.227 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. The application stands allowed.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 68652 of 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 74, 79 of the B.N.S.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and in sum and substance the informant alleges that on account of an allegation that his son had committed theft, the accused persons including the petitioner along with unknown accused assaulted him brutally. Accordingly, the police was informed and when the police reached, the police saved her son along with daughter inlaw Meena Devi, who was made captive by the mob.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

7/8 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioner assaulted her son Basant Das brutally causing injury, but then, the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple. It is submitted that had so many accused assaulted the son of the informant, in that event, he would have suffered multiple injuries, but then, that is not the case. It is further submitted that there is a delay of three days in instituting the FIR as the date of occurrence is 17.06.2025 and the FIR based on written application was submitted on 20.06.2025. It is submitted that from perusal of Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application, it would manifest that the injury has been opined to be simple and the petitioner is not named in the FIR.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.

8/8 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Raghopur P. S. Case No.227 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T