Patna High Court
Bablu Kumar @ Bablu RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Bablu Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder case arising from an alleged assault on 14‑03‑2025, where co‑accused Pappu Rai is said to have struck the victim with an iron rod, leading to his death. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought bail, arguing that the specific assault allegation pertains only to the co‑accused and that the FIR and case diary support his non‑involvement. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and the IT Act. The court examined the evidence, noted the petitioner’s clean record, and found no direct link to the assault, thereby granting bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposing conditions regarding trial cooperation, evidence tampering, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the lower court without delay for verification.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for bail despite being charged with serious offences including homicide under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and the IT Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement in the assault justify granting bail.
- Whether the court may impose conditions on bail such as bond, sureties, and compliance requirements.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(B), 66(D)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- homicide
- clean antecedent
- conditions of bail
- IT Act
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88281 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2025 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran
======================================================
Bablu Kumar @ Bablu Ray S/O Shailendra Ray @ Shailendra Rai R/V
Maharajganj, P.S- Gultenganj, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Eashita Raj, Advocate
: Mr. Rishav Ujjain, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard Ms. Eashita Raj, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
19.04.2025 in connection with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 148
of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.03.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and 66(B), 66(D) of the IT Act.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that on
14.03.2025 at 4 P.M, when informant’s nephew was at his shop,
then the petitioner along with other co-accused persons variously
armed with lathi, danda and rod came to his shop and demanded
Rs.5000/- and threatened to kill him. Upon protest, the accused
persons assaulted his nephew due to which he sustained injuries on
head and during the course of treatment he died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88281 of 2025(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated
in the present case. It appears from the FIR that specific allegation
of assault is against co-accused, Pappu Rai that he assaulted
deceased by means of Iron Rod but as per the injury report of the
deceased, only one injury was found on the person of the deceased.
She further submits that later on re-statement of informant was
taken which is recorded in paragraph-4 of the case diary in which
he has categorically stated that only Pappu Rai assaulted to his
nephew and apart from that number of witnesses have stated that
Pappu Rai has assaulted to the deceased which has been recorded
in paragraph nos.5 and 6 of case diary and the petitioner is in
custody since 19.04.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and it has come during
investigation that Pappu Rai had assaulted to the deceased, 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 C.J.M., Chapra,
Saran in connection with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 148 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88281 of 2025(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
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 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…