Pintu Dom @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83876 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-408 Year-2025 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Pintu Dom @ Pintu Kumar Son of Late Shyamsundar Dom Resident of Village - Gamail Ward No.- 2, P.S.- Bihariganj, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 408 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 126(2), 76, 324(2), 325, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of causing assault to the informant and her son along with other accused persons, besides the allegation of snatching of valuables and damaging the household articles.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that besides the fact that altogether 19 persons have been made accused in this case, there is no specific allegation attributed against the petitioner of causing assault which led to any injury. Moreover, the allegation of causing cut injury over the leg of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83876 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026 2/3 informant's son also does not corroborate with the injury report, as has been discussed in the impugned order which clearly suggests that the informant's son has sustained injury by hard and blunt substance. It is further submitted that only on account of the fact that the petitioner had some previsions enmity with the informant and his family members, his name has been implicated in this case; all the more there is no specific accusation against the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner bears fair antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully cooperate in the proceeding of the court.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that in the said incidence, the son of the informant has sustained grievous injury and the petitioner along with other co-accused persons are found to be responsible.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the omnibus nature of accusation, coupled with the fair antecedent as well as the injury report which suggests that the injury is caused by hard and blunt substance, 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83876 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026 3/3 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 SDJM-I, Udakishunganj, Madhepura in connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 408 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) Anjani/- U T