Rambahju Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77516 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rambahju Prasad S/O Harishankar Prasad @ Harishankar Sah RO Village - Laukariya, PS -Bairiya, District-West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 07.09.2025, in connection with Bairiya P.S. Case No. 396 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 06.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308(4), 308(5) of B.N.S.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons assaulted the informant and snatched a sum of Rs. 22,000/- cash from the informant and also took a sum of Rs. 5,000/- forcefully from the informant on QR Code with UPI ID.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

2/4 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that 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 perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that the informant developed intimacy with co-accused persons, namely, Prince Kumar and Ajit Kumar and their assurance the petitioner has come in Bihar and the informant has been received by coaccused Ranjit Kumar and thereafter the other co-accused person through UPI ID received money from the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that UPI ID which is mentioned in the F.I.R.

does not belong to the petitioner and petitioner has been made accused merely on the ground that he was present at the place of occurrence and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the motorcycle in question which was recovered from the petitioner belonged to the petitioner. He further submits that the the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 07.09.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

3/4 State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. 1st, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Bairiya P.S. Case No. 396 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) 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 bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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 antecedents, 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) Ibrar//- U T