Khublal Marandi @ Chhotelal Marandi @ Khuwlal Marandi Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Khublal Marandi @ Chhotelal Marandi @ Khuwlal Marandi Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional bail: petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Jamui in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 07 of 2002, subject to five conditions (family-member/relative bailor with bona fide official document; appearance on every trial date with cancellation on two consecutive unexplained absences; fortnightly police-station reporting for six months; no inducement/promise/threat to witnesses or tampering with evidences; desistance from further criminal offences).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 10.02.2025 in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 07 of 2002, should be released on bail notwithstanding the inordinate delay in coming to the Court.

Court's answer

Despite the inordinate delay in coming to the Court, this Court extended the privilege of bail with conditions, taking into account that the petitioner had remained in custody since 10.02.2025, had completed six months, and had undertaken to diligently appear in trial.

Ratio / Principle

Bail was made subject to conditions, including that failure to appear before the Trial Court on two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of the bail bond by the Trial Court itself, along with fortnightly police-station reporting for six months, non-tampering with witnesses or evidences, and desistance from further criminal offences.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Cr. Misc. No. 50026 of 2025 (Oral Order dated 11-08-2025), Rajiv Roy, J: Conditional bail granted to Khublal Marandi @ Chhotelal Marandi @ Khuwlal Marandi, in custody since 10.02.2025 in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 07 of 2002 (FIR lodged 07.02.2002 by informant LalMohan Yadav, alleging hundreds of naxali entered the village, raised slogans and made explosions), for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 120(B) of the I.P.C., section 27 of the Arms Act, sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Although the APP opposed bail citing inordinate delay in coming to the Court, bail was allowed on a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M., Jamui, subject to conditions: one bailor to be a family member/relative providing a bona fide official document; appearance on every trial date, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation by the Trial Court; fortnightly police-station reporting for six months; no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses or tampering with evidences; and desistance from committing any criminal offence again.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50026 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2002 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui

======================================================

Khublal Marandi @ Chhotelal Marandi @ Khuwlal Marandi S/o- Badku Marandi Village- Bendra Panchayat Thadhi Po- Bisodah Tola PsChandramadih Dist- Jamui

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL ORDER

2 11-08-2025

Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 07 of 2002 for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 120(B) of the I.P.C., section 27 of the Arms Act, section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 3/4 Prevention of Terrorism Act lodged on 07.02.2002 by the informant, LalMohan Yadav.

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that hundreds of naxali entered the village, raised slogans and made certain explosions. This led to the FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a bare perusal of the FIR would show that only to implicate, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50026 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 2/3

innocent poor people were made accused. He had no knowledge about his name which led to the delay and if granted bail, he shall be diligently appearing in trial.

Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh opposes the prayer for bail submitting that there has been inordinate delay in coming to the Court.

Taking into account the submission of the parties, it is a fact that there is inordinate delay, petitioner has remained in custody since 10.02.2025, has completed six months and an undertaking has been given that he shall be diligently appearing in trial, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M. Jamui in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 07 of 2002 subject to the following conditions:

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50026 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 3/3

dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for six months to mark his attendance;

(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Adnan/-

U T