Manish Kumar @ Rinku v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20260 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2024 Thana- HATHIDAH District- Patna ====================================================== Manish Kumar @ Rinku S/O Sri Samar Bahadur Singh Resident of VillageBajariya, PS- Shahar, Dist.- Ara ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-04-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 14.03.2024 in connection with S.Tr. No. 732 of 2024 arising out of Hathidah P.S. Case No. 27 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 03.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365 and 396 of Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant's driver, namely, Vipin Kumar was going from Danapur to Khagaria by car, when he reached near Mokama Tol, some persons stopped him and forcefully took away vehicle with from them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
2/4 petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., the name of the petitioner has been transpierd on the basis of the confessional statement made by the co-accused person, namely, Sunil Pandit Amit Kumar @ Golu and except the confessional statement of the similar situated co-accused person, no other material came during investigation, which suggests the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. The said co-accused person, namely, Sunil Pandit and Amit Kumar @ Golu have been granted the bail vide orders dated 21.09.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 46866 of 2024 and 28.02.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 86703 of 2024 respectively granted the privilege of bail by this Court. Apart from that the other co-accused persons, namely, Rishu Kumar, Raushan Kumar, Barun Paswan and Aman Kumar also granted the privilege of bail by this Court. The police after investigation submitted the charge-sheet. The petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2024.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries seven 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
3/4 matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the confessional statement made by the co-accused person, namely, Sunil Pandit Amit Kumar @ Golu and except the confessional statement of the similar situated co-accused person. The other co-accused persons have been granted the privilege of bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, 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 Additional District Judge-II, Barh (Patna) in connection with Hathidah P.S. Case No. 27 of 2024, subject to the 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
4/4 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