Ram Babu Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73812 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ram Babu Sah Son of Late Shankar Sah R/o Village - Adalpur, P.S. - Sursand, Dist. - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-11-2025 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 109, 352, 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is of causing assault over the informant due to which he sustained serious injuries; besides further omnibus allegations against all the accused persons.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the informant are own brothers and only on account of previous dispute they entered into a free fight leading to injuries to persons of both the sides. There is counter version
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73812 of 2025(2) dt.20-11-2025 2/3 of the present case, being Sursand P.S. Case No.107 of 2025 lodged by the petitioner against the informant and others. The informant along with others have also caused assault to the petitioner out of which one of the injuries was found to be grievous in nature, but surprisingly the informant and others have been allowed privilege of anticipatory bail by the court below itself, whereas the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stood rejected taking note of the fact that the petitioner has assaulted the informant resulting into three injuries.
Out of the three injuries, one of the injuries, which is sustained over the shoulder of the informant is concerned, the same has been found to be simple in nature, but from the narrations made in the FIR, it has not been alleged that the petitioner has assaulted over the shoulder of the informant. It is further contended that though the petitioner bears two criminal antecedents, however, one of which has been instituted by the wife of the informant and in both the cases the petitioner is on bail. It is lastly contended that be that as it may, the occurrence took place on 04.03.2025, but the FIR came to be instituted on 07.03.2025 without there being any sufficient explanation for causing delay.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73812 of 2025(2) dt.20-11-2025 3/3 vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner has actively participated in the crime and assaulted the informant along with others leading to serious injuries.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the relationship between the parties coupled with the factum of case and counter case; besides the fact that the accused persons of the counter case having similar allegations have been allowed privilege of anticipatory bail by the court below itself, let the petitioner abovenamed be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Pupri, Sitamarhi/Competent Jurisdiction in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) Pawan/- U T