The court emphasized the importance of prior bail conditions and proper representation at all hearings when granting bail.

For the Petitioner/s : Mrs .Rekha Ranjan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 20-01-2026 Heard Mrs .Rekha Ranjan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

10.10.2025 in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No. 292 of 2007, F.I.R. dated 23.07.2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 341 , 323, 379, 504, 427 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. According to prosecution case, on 23.09.2007, when the informant was returning from his field, the informant’s nephew told him that mare of the petitioner and co-accused persons have grazed paddy seedling. Thereafter, the informant went to inquire then the accused persons started abusing him and on objection they assaulted him with lathi-danda.

Thereafter, the informant’s brother came hearing the noise then the petitioner and the co-accused, Devendra Yadav assaulted him with lathi and the co-accused, Anil Yadav and Bucchi @ Satish Yadav assaulted the informant with lathi-danda. On hearing noise, villagers came to rescue, in the meantime, the co- accused, Anil Yadav and Bucchi Yadav @ Satish Yadav assaulted him with lathi on his head and back due to which he sustained head injury and the informant’s brother was also assaulted by the petitioner and the co-accused, Devendra Yadav with lathi causing injury on his leg.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has been granted bail on 20.09.2007 by learned A.C.J.M., Hilsa, but his bail bond was cancelled vide order dated 10.08.2010. He further submits that petitioner has no knowledge that his bail bond was cancelled by the court below itself and when he has come to know that his bail bond is cancelled he was remanded from another case on 10.10.2025.

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

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has already been granted bail by the lower court itself and it was cancelled due to none appearance of the petitioner, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No. 292 of 2007, 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)