Parshuram Singh @ Pashuram Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2595 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2024 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN DistrictAurangabad ====================================================== Parshuram Singh @ Pashuram Singh Son of Late Ishwar Singh R/o Village - Bahera, P.S. - Aamas, Dist. - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 284 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 379 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that he being the conductor of the bus has stolen the mobile phone and jewellery bag of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is false and there is nothing to substantiate such allegation. It has further been submitted that during the course of investigation, the sister of the informant, who was travelling with her sister did not support
2/4 the statement of the informant that the mobile phone rang inside the pocket of the conducted/petitioner. It has further been submitted that no recovery whatsoever has been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner or from his house. He further submits that admittedly, the mobile phone was found to be missing when she was climbing the bus and hence, the allegation upon the petitioner become false as he was the conductor of the bus and was already present inside the bus. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner carries clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 284 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
3/4 corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned 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.
4/4
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U