Vinod Ram @ Vinod Paswan @ Binod Paswan @ Ravi Yadav @ Navin Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76903 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2014 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Vinod Ram @ Vinod Paswan @ Binod Paswan @ Ravi Yadav @ Navin Yadav Son of Mukhraj Ram @ Mukhraj Paswan Resident of Village - Golgariva, P.S.- Kutumba (Wrongly mentioned in F.I.R. as village - Kendua, P.S.- Nabinagar), District - Aurangabad (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Aman Vishal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Aman Vishal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 02.06.2025 in connection with Roshanganj (Bankebazaar) P.S. Case No. 19 of 2014, F.I.R. 19.02.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 121A, 122, 124A, 307, 353 of the I.P.C. and sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosives Substances Act and sections 13, 16, 18, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and section 17 of C.L.A. Act.
3. According to prosecution case, on information that
2/4 some naxalities are hiding at Madhya Vidyalaya, Sondaha, the Police conducted raid and named 28 persons in the F.I.R., whereas 25 naxalties are not named. The police found 3 cane bombs weighing 5 kg. each at the place but all the naxalties managed to flee away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From bare perusal of F.I.R. it appears there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner and similarly situated coaccused, namely, Bhim Yadav @ Hari Mohan has been granted regular bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.09.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34247 of 2017. He further submits that the police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 02.06.2025.
5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries four more criminal antecedents other than the present one.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that there is no specific allegation of any assault or
3/4 overt act attributed against the petitioner and similarly situated co-accused person has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati, Gaya (Bihar) in connection with Roshanganj (Bankebazaar) P.S. Case No. 19 of 2014, with the following conditions:
i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner 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 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
4/4 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) Ranjeet/- U T