Pancham KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16570 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2025 Thana- Rampur Chauram District- Arwal
                 ======================================================
                 Pancham Kumar S/o Late Deobali Mahto R/o Village - Kateshar Tola, Ram
                 Nath Bigha, P.S - Rampur Chauram, District - Arwal

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Gyanand Roy, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-03-2026                      Heard Mr. Gyanand Roy, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned APP for the State.

                                 2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   18.11.2025, in connection with Chauram P.S. Case No. 95 of

                   2025, F.I.R. dated 17.11.2025                 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 303(2), 62, 109, 3(5) of the B.N.S.

                   and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has tried

                   to stop the informant by means of lathi.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16570 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          It appears from the F.I.R. that the allegation of firing attributed

          against co-accused person namely Jawaharlal Mistry and the

          allegation against the petitioner is that he has tried to stop the

          informant by means of lathi and there is no accusation against

          him in the F.I.R. He further submits that the police after

          investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and

          the petitioner is in custody since 18.11.2025.

                        5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for               bail of the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there

          is no allegation of any assault or overt act or firing against the

          petitioner and there is specific allegation of firing against co-

          accused Jawaharlal Mistry, 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 District & Sessions Judge-I, Arwal in

          connection with Rampur Chauram P.S. Case No. 95 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
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16570 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                         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)
Ibrar//-

U          T