The court emphasizes the principles of bail and factors such as false implication and absence of concrete evidence when determining bail eligibility.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

14.08.2025 in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 533 of 2018, F.I.R. dated 31.10.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 448 , 341, 323, 326, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act .

3. According to prosecution case, on 31.10.2018, when the informant was returning to his house after attending nature’s call, the accused persons caught him and assaulted him with lathi-danda, but any how the informant fled away from there. When the informant came to his house, he saw that his son has sustained bullet injury in his right heel. The informant also saw that the co-accused, Nitish Kumar was fleeing away from his door holding pistol in his hand. Thereafter, the informant took his son to P.M.C.H. for treatment. Further, the informant came to know that his aunt Rita Devi was also injured from the firing made by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case due to land dispute. 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. As per the FIR, the petitioner has fired upon aunt of the informant but there is no injury report available on the record which suggests that she has received any injury. There is case and counter case between the parties. The co-accused person, namely, Nitish Kumar has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 29.06.2020 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 9583 of 2020. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner.

The petitioner is in custody since 14.08.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries one more criminal antecedent other than the present one.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 the learned A.C.J.M. VI, Danapur, Patna in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No.

533 of 2018, subject to 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his 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)