Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar Ram @ Sonu RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the unexplained delay in the FIR and the contradictory statements warrant the grant of bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar Ram, sought bail in connection with a criminal case (Pandaul PS Case No. 277/2025) alleging offences under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault and theft. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted an informant with a lathi and stole a gold locket worth Rs. 30,000. The petitioner contended that the injury was due to a road accident, as reflected in a medical report, and highlighted an unexplained eight‑day delay in lodging the FIR. The court observed a sharp contradiction between the medical statement and the FIR allegations, and noted the delay as unexplained. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 30,000, subject to conditions under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and Section 482(2) of the same act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the eight‑day delay in filing the FIR and the contradictory medical report justify granting bail.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and Section 482(2) are applicable.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 2(1), 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 329(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 74, 76
Subjects
- bail
- FIR delay
- contradictory evidence
- assault
- theft
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10500 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-277 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
======================================================
Sonu Kumar Ram @ Sonu Ram S/o Jirekhan Ram Resident of village-
Haiderpur Purvai tola, P.S- Pandaul, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner who apprehends arrest in connection
with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 277/2025 lodged on 11.12.2025, for
the offences punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1),
109(1), 74, 76, 303(2), 329(4), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been
lodged against three named accused persons including the
present petitioner. There is a specific allegation against the
petitioner that he assaulted the informant with a lathi. It is
further alleged that the petitioner entered into the house of the
informant and snatched a gold locket worth Rs. 30,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10500 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is
submitted that for the alleged occurrence dated 03.12.2025, the
F.I.R. was lodged on 11.12.2025 with a delay of eight days and
the same has not been explained. Learned counsel further
submits that the injury report annexed with the bail application
as Annexure P/2 reflects that the doctor examined the injured on
03.12.2025 and the case was noted to be that of a road accident.
He submits that while it was acknowledged before the doctor
that the injury was caused due to a road accident, after eight
days the F.I.R. has been lodged making false allegations against
three accused persons including the present petitioner. It is
further submitted that though the petitioner is accused in one
more criminal case, he has been granted bail in the said case.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail but submits that there are specific allegations in the F.I.R.
against the petitioner.
6. From the perusal of the record and the arguments
advanced by the parties, this Court finds that there appears to be
a sharp contradiction between the statement made before the
doctor and the allegations made in the F.I.R. Further, there is a
delay of about eight days in lodging the F.I.R., which has not
been explained, let the above named petitioner be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10500 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bond of ₹30000/- (thirty thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)
(d) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to the
satisfaction of the learned CJM, Madhubani, in connection with
the aforementioned case, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U T
Checking your session…