Bail granted based on clean antecedents and circumstances of the case amidst ongoing land dispute.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned Advocate for the State.

2. It has been apprised to this Court that the prayer for bail on behalf of the petitioner no.2 has already been withdrawn vide order dated 19.09.2025.

3. The petitioners no.1, 3, 4 and 5 are apprehending their arrest in connection with Hasanpur P.S. Case No.49 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 74, 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023.

4. Allegedly, on the fateful day, on 20.03.2025, while the accused persons, including the petitioners along with 8-10 unknown persons were forcibly filling the soil in the vacant land of the informant and when the same was protested by the husband of the informant and other family members, the petitioners brutally assaulted the informant's husband by means of pistol, iron rod, barchhi, lathi, danda, and bricks. It is specifically alleged that Shravan Yadav and Panna Lal Yadav assaulted the husband of the informant on his head, whereas Sanjjan Yadav and Niraj Yadav assaulted Makeshwar Yadav with the butt of a gun and iron rod. Other co-accused persons assaulted other family members. There is a further allegation of snatching valuables, besides allegation of misbehaving. 5. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that there is admitted long-standing enmity between the parties on account of a land dispute, which fact is also evident from the pendency of Title Suit No. 107 of 2004 before Sub Judge-IV, Rosera. The alleged occurrence took place on 20.03.2025, but the present FIR was instituted on 28.03.2025, without there being any explanation for the delay. Prior to the institution of the present case, person of the petitioners’ side has instituted Hasanpur P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025 against the husband of the informant and others. On the said incident, the persons of the petitioners’ side also sustained injuries, but the prosecution has failed to explain the injuries sustained to them. The injuries, which are allegedly sustained by the informant's husband is concerned, all of them have been found to be simple in nature, except injury no.3, for which final opinion has not been disclosed due to absence of dental opinion. The petitioners no. 1 and 5 have absolutely clean antecedents, whereas petitioners no. 3 and 4 are accused in one case; however, they undertake that they will fully cooperate in the proceedings of the Court.

6. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State, vehemently opposed the bail application.

7. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the long-standing land dispute leading to institution of case and counter case, coupled with the nature of injuries sustained to the informant's husband and others, let the above named petitioners no. 1, 3, 4 and 5, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 3^rd Rosera, Samastipur in connection with Hasanpur P.S. Case No.49 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS , with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.

(Harish Kumar, J)