Surendra SinghversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4621 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Surendra Singh S/o Late Ramashankar Singh @ Bhuteli Singh Village-
                 Katalpur (Fakalpura), P.S.- Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Juli Kumari W/o Ranjan Singh R/o Village Dumri P.S. Manjhi Dist Chhapra
                 at saran

                                                         ... ... Opposite Parties
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Anand Vardhan
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Umeshanand Pandit
                 For the Informant        :      Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   14-05-2026                       Heard Mr. Anand Vardhan, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner, Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

                   informant and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   19.08.2025 in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 288

                   of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(1),

                   127(1), 115(1), 118(1), 124(1), 85, 109(1), 351(3), 352, 3(5) of

                   the BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

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

                   informant's sister was married with accused Ranjan Singh son of

                   this petitioner in the years 2020. After marriage, all the accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4621 of 2026(6) dt.14-05-2026
                                            2/4




          persons started torturing the informant's sister and demanded

          Rs. 5 Lakh in dowry. On refusal, petitioner along with other

          accused persons set the informant's sister on fire by pouring

          kerosene oil. Thereafter, victim was brought to Patna and she

          was admitted in Shristi hospital. Hence the FIR.

                      4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has

          falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further

          submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and

          fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

          alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that it appears from the

          FIR itself that the informant has alleged that the date of

          occurrence is 03.07.2025 but the FIR has been instituted on

          10.08.2025 i.e., after a delay of more than one month without

          giving any explanation of delay. It is next submitted that from

          perusal of the statement of the victim which is part of the FIR

          suggests that there is no specific allegation rather the allegations

          are general and omnibus in nature against four accused persons

          including the petitioner and injury report of the victim also

          suggests that injury sustained is simple in nature. It is next

          submitted that the police after investigation has submitted

          charge-sheet and petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4621 of 2026(6) dt.14-05-2026
                                            3/4




                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State

          and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed

          the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that the petitioner

          has participated in the present crime in question and number of

          witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          and that petitioner has clean antecedent, 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 Judicial Magistrate-1st

          Class, Gopalganj in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No.

          288 of 2025, subject to 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 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4621 of 2026(6) dt.14-05-2026
                                                       4/4




                     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