Sonu Mafia @ Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69002 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2025 Thana- DEEPNAGAR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Sonu Mafia @ Sonu Kumar Son of Shivendra Paswan Resident of village - Jagjiwanpur, P.S.- Sarmera, Dist.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nagendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Deepnagar P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 352, 308(4) of the B.N.S and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that during the construction of the minority hospital, five unknown persons came to the site and threatened to stop the work and also resorted to firing. It is further alleged that on the same day at around 7 P.M. from an unknown mobile number, extortion money of twenty lakh rupees was demanded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the allegation against
2/4 him is false and concocted. It has further been submitted that the name of the petitioner transpired during the investigation, wherein his name has surfaced on the statement of a spy and subsequently in the statement of the co-accused, namely, Tunni Yadav, who is said to have stated that the petitioner is also an accomplice. It has next been submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner or from his house. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent, which is under Sections 406 and 420 and he is on bail in the same.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Deepnagar P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
3/4 corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
4/4
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U