Patna High Court
/48292/2026 of Rohan Kumar @ Prince Ashish @ Rohan Vs The State of Bihar on 22 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48292 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-853 Year-2025 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== 1. Rohan Kumar @ Prince Ashish @ Rohan, Son of Subhash Sah Resident of Village- New Colony,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48292 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-853 Year-2025 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa ======================================================
1.
Rohan Kumar @ Prince Ashish @ Rohan, Son of Subhash Sah Resident of Village- New Colony, Beside Tiger Tent House PS and Dist- Sahrsa
2.
Niraj Kuamr @ Niraj Kr, Son of Pramod Bhagat Resident of Village- Sarahi Ward no. 5/40, PS and Dist- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
22-07-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned Advocate for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.853 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(1), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 109 and 303(2) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Allegedly, in the morning of 26.07.2025, while the informant's son was returning from his coaching classes, the petitioners, along with certain unknown persons, intercepted him and snatched his valuables. When the informant’s son protested, the petitioners, along with the other accused persons, allegedly assaulted him, as a result of which he sustained injuries.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48292 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the informant is admittedly not an eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. It is further contended that the learned court below has not disclosed the nature of the injuries sustained by the victim, which, prima facie, appear to be simple in nature. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to a previous dispute between the parties. It is also submitted that both the petitioners and the informant belong to the same village, and there was no plausible reason or occasion for the petitioners to indulge in the alleged act of snatching the valuables of the informant's son. It is further contended that although the alleged occurrence took place in the morning of 26.07.2025, but the FIR came to be instituted on 27.07.2025 on the ground that the informant was residing in Delhi and lodged the case only after his arrival. However, in the meantime, other family members were available and could have lodged the FIR, thereby rendering the delay unexplained.
5. Learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioners have two criminal antecedents each and there are specific allegations against the petitioners of assaulting the victim and snatching his valuables.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48292 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026
6. Having considered the submissions advanced and taking note of the delay in lodging the FIR, coupled with the fact that the nature of the injuries has not been disclosed by the learned court below as well as the informant is not an eyewitness to the alleged occurrence, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.853 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(ii) If the petitioners are found involve in intimidating/ threatening the witnesses or the informant or would indulge in such activities in future, the informant/State shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of their bail bond(s).
rohit/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T