The absence of specific allegations against the accused and the delay in filing the FIR justified the grant of bail.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, dated 07-02-2025 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 191 (2), 190, 127(1), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on

07.01.2025, at about 9:00 AM, five accused persons including the petitioner attacked the tempo of the informant’s husband near Kulrauri Pathraura. The accused persons broke the vehicle’s glass with rods, beat him severely and even shot at him rendering him unconscious. The informant’s husband was rescued by villagers and the police admitted him to the hospital for treatment.

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation of assault has been levelled against all five FIR-named accused persons, including the petitioner. However, there is no specific allegation attributed against the petitioner; rather, the allegations against him are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that there is no eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. The occurrence is stated to have taken place on 07.01.2025, whereas the FIR was lodged on 07.02.2025, after an unexplained delay of one month, for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. Referring to the injury report of the informant’s husband, annexed as Annexure P/2, it is submitted that he sustained multiple grievous injuries, including fracture on the distal shaft of the left tibia and fibula, a fracture on the shaft of the mid-humerus of the left shoulder as well as a fracture on the distal radius and ulna of the left arm. Although the injuries are described as grievous in nature, they are stated to have been caused by a hard and blunt object. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 26.11.2025. He has four criminal cases pending against him, in all of which he has already been granted bail.

5. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below, (ii) that one of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse (iv) that 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 and (v) that the petitioner will appear before the SHO of concerned PS in the first week of each month till the framing of charge in this case.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Khatim Reza, J)