Mukesh Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3861 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-517 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Mukesh Ravidas S/O Dev Nandan Rabidas R/O Village- Satnag, P.S- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shashi Chand Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026 Heard Mr.Shashi Chand Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.Pushpa Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 08.09.2025 in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 517 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 07.09.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 190,191(i), 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(i), 74, 352, 351(2) of BNS.
3. According to prosecution case, all the accused persons named in the FIR were armed with Khanti, Rod, lathi and country made pistol entered into the house of the informant and abused him. It is further stated that Gautam Rabidas assaulted with iron rod on her left shoulder. Accused Madhusudan assaulted to Shashi Kant on his head by Khanti,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3861 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 Jitendra Rabidas assaulted to Harendra Rabidas and he received injury on head. Amarjeet received injury by Khanti by Gautam left leg due to such reason his leg was fractured.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from the FIR that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence had taken place. There is case and counter case. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt-act attributed against the petitioner in the FIR rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner and the injuries inflicted upon the injured persons are simple in nature. The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and till date no TIP has been conducted by the prosecution and the petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, 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 learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Chandi P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3861 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026 3/3 No. 517 of 2025, 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/her 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 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) Nitesh/- U T