Rounak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19972 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2024 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Rounak Kumar Son of Ramakant Kumar @ Ramakant Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Sadanandpur, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2025 Heard Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection withBalia P.S. Case No. 159 of 2024 , F.I.R. dated 17.05.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant and other subordinates during patrolling found two 315 bore of cartridge.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19972 of 2025(2) dt.24-04-2025 2/3 committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the date of occurrence is 16.05.2024 but the present F.I.R. was instituted on 17.05.2024 , after delay of one day without giving any explanation of delay and even none of the villagers has come forward to inform the police with regard to the present occurrence. Apart from that the villagers also did not disclose the name of the petitioner and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by the coaccused person, namely, Heeramani Kumar, who was arrested.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R and apart from that the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by the co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19972 of 2025(2) dt.24-04-2025 3/3 Balia P.S. Case No. 159 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Jyoti Kumari/- U T