Bail granted based on lack of evidence and clean antecedents with conditions imposed.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

27.08.2024 in connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 05.08.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other co-accused persons are alleged to have attacked the informant’s son by means of knife and killed him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and the name of petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused person, Rohit Kumar which is recorded in paragraph 98 of the case diary and thereafter the self confessional statement of petitioner in paragraph 81 of case diary in which she has stated that she along with the co-accused person, namely, Rohit Kumar have killed the deceased, except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, even the arms which was used in the present occurrence, has not been recovered by the prosecution as yet. He further submits that the police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024 (one year four months).

5. Learned APP for the State and informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and fairly submits that during investigation, it has come that the petitioner has illicit relation with the co-accused persons, namely, Rohit Kumar and Rohit Kumar killed the deceased.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner has clean antecedent and except the confessional statement of the petitioner no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, 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 14^th Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 332 of 2024 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 her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, 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 her 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)