Narendra Rai @ Nirendra Rai Vs The state of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 11-08-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Buxar Town P.S. Case No. 274 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 318(2), 317(2) of B.N.S.

¶15

As per prosecution case, on 24.05.2025 the informant hired E. rickshaw for going to her native village. It is alleged that when she reached at her destination she found that her bag was torn with blade and her jwellery worth Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- in cash were missing. Hence, FIR was lodged against passengers and driver of said E. rickshaw.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53826 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 2/3

¶18

petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and they have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioners are in jail custody since 27.05.2025 and bear no criminal antecedent. He further submits that name of petitioners surfaced in this case upon confessional statement of co-accused Ganga Sagar Ram, as mentioned in the impugned order. Except disclosure of said co-accused, there is nothing on record to connect the present petitioners with the alleged occurrence. He further submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from possession of the petitioners rather the alleged recovery was made from the house of co-accused Aftab Ansari and petitioners have no concern with co-accused Aftab Ansari. He further submits that petitioners are daily wages labourers in the area and they somehow managed to earn their livelihood to run their family.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of the petitioners, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53826 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 3/3

¶22

bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in connection with Buxar Town P.S. Case No. 274 of 2025, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶24

(ii) Petitioners will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶25

(iii) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶27

shahzad/-

¶28

U T

Narendra Rai @ Nirendra Rai v. The state of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Rai @ Nirendra Rai v. The state of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Singh Vs The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary

Rakesh Sada Vs The State of Bihar

Bhulan Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Rupesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manikant Kumar @ Manikant @ Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Devendra Sharma Vs The State of Bihar