Sanju Das @ Sanjay DasversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21987 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2024 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Sanju Das @ Sanjay Das S/o Suraj Das Resident of Village - Jethuli, P.S -
                 Nadi, District - Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Chandrasekhar Sharma
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   15-05-2026                      Heard Mr. Chandrasekhar Sharma, learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   14.10.2024 in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 330 of 2024

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of

                   BNS.

                               3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the

                   basis of fardbayan of informant Omprakash Kumar @ Munna

                   and it has been alleged by the informant that on 21.09.2025

                   petitioner Nitish Kumar and informant went to place of

                   occurrence and there co-accused Vikash Kumar snatched mobile

                   phone and Rs. 900/- cash form informant and shot informant in

                   his back due to informant sustained injury and later on he was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21987 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
                                            2/4




          admitted in the hospital by the chowkidar. After investigation

          charge sheet has been submitted against this petitioner and co-

          accused Vikash Kumar and also against petitioner Puja Kumari

          u/s- 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 3(5) B.N.S & 27 Arms Act. It

          appears from the case diary para 6 that informant has supported

          the allegation against the petitioner Nitish Kumar and he has

          stated that petitioner Nitish Kumar took informant to a river side

          and there co-accused shot informant. Further, as per case diary

          para no 47 petitioner had paid money to co-accused Vikash

          Kumar for committing murder of informant.

                      4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been implicated

          in the present case. It is further submitted that earlier the bail

          petition was rejected vide order dated 15.05.2025 passed in Cr.

          Misc. No. 18033 of 2025 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this

          Court. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved before this

          Court but the same was withdrawn vide order dated 20.01.2026

          passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1988 of 2026 passed by a Coordinate

          Bench of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner next

          submits that the petitioner has been made an accused in the

          present case merely on the basis of suspicion and except the

          aforesaid nothing has come during the investigation to suggest
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21987 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
                                            3/4




          the involvement of the petitioner with the present occurrence. It

          is next submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons,

          namely, Munna Das and Sanjeet Das have been granted bail by

          a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.02.2026

          passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 85244 of 2025 and 1890 of 2026

          respectively and the police after investigation has submitted

          charge-sheet and petitioner is in custody since 14.10.2024.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State

          has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

          submits that petitioner is involved in the present crime in

          question but fairly submits that on the basis of the report of the

          learned trial court dated 05.05.2026, which suggests that out of

          nine charge-sheet witnesses, only five witnesses have been

          examined and trial is pending for four charge-sheet witnesses.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          and that petitioner has clean antecedent and report of the learned

          trial court as well as period of custody, 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 ADJ-I, Patna City in

          connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 330 of 2024, subject to the

          following conditions:-
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21987 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
                                                       4/4




                                  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)
Gaurav Sinha/-

U      T