Patna High Court
Samresh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Samresh Kumar, was arrested on 28 May 2025 in connection with a case involving the death of a CICL who allegedly died after being assaulted by the petitioner and others. The petitioner contended that the FIR was fabricated, that the allegations were general and omnibus, and that there were no eye‑witnesses, making the case purely suspicion‑based. The prosecution opposed bail, noting the petitioner’s name in the FIR and a prior criminal case, though he was on bail in that matter. The court observed that co‑accused Nitish Kumar and Deepak Yadav had already been released on bail and that the allegations against the petitioner were indeed vague. Consequently, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being named in an FIR with general and omnibus allegations and no eye‑witnesses.
- Whether the existence of prior criminal antecedent and the fact that co‑accused have been granted bail affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- general and omnibus allegations
- suspicion
- co‑accused bail
- Section 103
- Section 3
- BNS
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83640 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2025 Thana- LAHERIYASARAI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Samresh Kumar S/O Dilip Kumar Deepak R/o Vill.- Bakua, P.S - Bheja,
District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Alias Ashok Karn, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 25-03-2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
28.05.2025 in connection with Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 245 of
2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5)
of BNS.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 10-4-2025
at about 11.00 PM, the CICL Complaint about pain in his
stomach at which he was immediately taken to DMCH,
Darbhanga and he was again called by DMCH on 11-4-2025 for
his ultrasound. On 11-4-2025 while he was taken back from
DMCH, then the CICL, jumped out from the vehicle and tried to
escape but, somehow he was caught by the guard and taken
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83640 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026
2/4
back to observation home. At about 6.30 PM the other inmates
of the observation home told the officials present in the
observation home that the aforesaid CICL felt unconscious. The
CICL was immediately taken to DMCH, Darbhanga again, but
he died. During the course of investigation, it came to the
knowledge of the I.O. that the present petitioner along with
other seven accused persons brutally assailed this CICL at
which, he felt unconscious and died during his treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare
perusal of the FIR it appears that although the petitioner is
named in the FIR but there is no specific allegation against the
petitioner. It is next submitted that the allegations are general
and omnibus in nature against all the accused persons including
the petitioner and it appears from the FIR itself that no one has
seen the occurrence. It is next submitted that there is no eye-
witness to the occurrence in question and the petitioner has been
made an accused in this case based on suspicion. It is further
submitted that co-accused persons namely, Nitish Kumar @
Nitish Kumar Yadav and Deepak Yadav have been granted bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83640 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026
3/4
vide order dated 23.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83714 of
2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 3312 of 2026 by a Coordinate Bench of
this Court. It is next submitted that petitioner is remanded in the
present case from Bheja P.S. Case No. 84 of 2023 on
28.05.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is named in the
FIR. Apart from aforesaid, the petitioner has antecedent of one
case other than the present case but fairly submits that the
petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that co-accused persons namely, Nitish Kumar @
Nitish Kumar Yadav and Deepak Yadav have been granted bail
vide order dated 23.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83714 of
2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 3312 of 2026 by a Coordinate Bench of
this Court and the allegations leveled against the petitioner are
general and omnibus in nature, 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 ACJM-VI, Darbhanga in connection
with Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83640 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026
4/4
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 canceled 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
Checking your session…