The court emphasized that lack of clear evidence of participation in an assault can lead to the granting of bail despite several pending cases.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.S. Ashraf, Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 22-01-2026 Heard Mr. S.S. Ashraf, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

15.09.2025, in connection with Goradih P.S. Case No. 255 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 14.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 74, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act .

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have assaulted the husband of the informant by means of iron rod due to which he received injury.

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that 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. Although, the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner rather there is allegation that he along with other co-accused person, namely, Anandi Paswan have assaulted the husband of the informant by means of iron rod and he has received injury but from perusal of the injury report of the injured person namely Nawal Kishore Yadav suggests that he has received only one injury which is grievous in nature but it is not clear in the F.I.R. that who assaulted the husband of the informant and the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that out of two cases, the petitioner is on bail in one case and one case is pending for consideration before the competent court of law.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in connection with Goradih P.S. Case No. 255 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) 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.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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 antecedents, 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)