Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12797 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2024 Thana- GAUTAMBUDHNAGAR DistrictSiwan ====================================================== Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Kumar singh S/o- Babloo Singh @ Babloo Kr. Singh Resident of village- Jalalpur PS- GB Nagar Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Y.C Verma, Sr. Adv Ms.Kumari Anupam, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rana Randheer Singh, APP Mr. Ashok Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2025 1.

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of five cases. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the informant alleges that on 18-6-2024, his grandson received a call on his mobile and while leaving the house, on asking of the informant, he

2/4 disclosed that he had been called by Ankit, Sachin and Manish and thereafter left the house, further at 8 pm, he received an information that his grandson has been shot and the police has taken him to Sardar Hospital, accordingly he reached Sardar Hospital, where he came to know that his grandson has been killed, thus alleges based on suspicion that Ankit, Sachin and Manish had called his grandson and they killed him. 4.

The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf the petitioner submits that the informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on receiving a call, the deceased was leaving the house when he informed that he has been called by Ankit, Manish and Sachin. It is further submitted that had the deceased not been on good terms with the aforesaid named accused persons, in that event he would not have gone to meet them, which amply demonstrates that the relationship in between the deceased and the accused were cordial. It is also submitted that while leaving the house, the deceased did not even remotely suggested that he was not having good relations with the accused persons. It is next submitted at the cost of repetition that the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. 5.

The learned APP and the learned counsel appearing

3/4 on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the deceased, while leaving the house, clearly disclosed the name of the petitioner that he was going to meet him and thereafter he was shot, as such suspicion points towards the petitioner and the other accused person. It is further submitted that investigation is continuing and in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, in that event, the petitioner may abscond as he has antecedent of five cases, on which the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond, rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7.

Considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with G.B. Nagar P.S.

4/4 Case No. 311 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

8.

One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father, Babloo Singh @ Babloo Kr. Singh.

9.

However, it is made clear that in the event, if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving assurance to this court, is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

10.

It is further made clear that if charge sheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence, in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect. 11.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T