Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15739 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-310 Year-2023 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Sharma Son of Hari Krishna Sharma @ Hare Krishna Sharma Resident of Village- Amha (Ward no. 3), P.S.- Lokaha, Distt.- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arun Kumar Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 310 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Section 392, 411, 412 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, the Informant, who is a supplier of newspaper, was accosted with three unknown miscreants who have snatched Rs. 5,000/- and one mobile phone on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15739 of 2025(2) dt.05-03-2025 2/3 recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner or from his house. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. his name has surfaced in this case in course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of the accused of Supaul (Laukaha) P.S. Case No. 809 of 2023 and, except confessional statement, there is nothing against the petitioner. He further submits that the looted mobile has been recovered from the house of the co-accused Ganesh Poddar from the room of his son Neeraj Poddar. There is a non-compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents and is languishing in judicial custody since 29.08.2024 without any rhymes or reason. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case against the petitioner and other co-accused persons. The cognizance has also been taken.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner again submits that the co-accused namely Pintu Sharma has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65807 of 2024. Co-accused Md. Tahil has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83943 of 2024.
6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15739 of 2025(2) dt.05-03-2025 3/3 vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stating that the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature. He further submits that the police has recovered one motorcycle and one mobile of vivo company from the house of the petitioner and, hence, he does not deserve bail.
7. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody of the petitioner as also the prayer for bail being based on parity, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 310 of 2023.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T