Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21740 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2025 Thana- PACHMAHLA District- Patna ====================================================== Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Singh Son of Pramod Singh village- Nauranga, PspachMahla, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pachmahla P. S. Case No. 03 of 2025, dated 22-01-2025 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 308(5), 308(4) 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023.
3.The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant was working as a Munshi (clerk) at a brick kiln situated in Khutaha Dih, owned by Mantu Singh, and was receiving a monthly remuneration of Rs. 13,000. It is further alleged that from 01.06.2022, the operations of the brick kiln were taken over by petitioner and Monu Kumar. As both persons were of a criminal background, the informant resigned from his job.
2/4 However, they began pressuring him to resume his duties as a clerk and through intimidation, compelled him to continue work. They avoided paying his full salary, providing only partial payments while compelling him to work. When the informant demanded his full wages, they gave threats. Upon his refusal to continue work, petitioner along with co-accused, Monu Kumar, Saurav Kumar, Gautam Kumar and Kanhaiya Kumar, all armed with deadly weapons, entered the informant's house and tried to forcibly take him outside. When the informant's wife, Heera Devi, resisted, they abused her and assaulted her with the butt of a pistol, causing serious injuries to her face, lips, and teeth. After assaulting, petitioner demanded a ransom of Rs. 60 lakhs, threatening to kill the family if the amount was not paid. Before departing, they locked the house and warned that if the ransom was not paid within a week, the entire family would be killed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged against five named accused persons, including the petitioner. It is further submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner; rather, the allegations made are general and omnibus
3/4 in nature. Learned counsel further submits that the injury report of the informant's wife, annexed as Annexure-4 to the supplementary affidavit filed on 16.04.2025, reveals the injury as simple in nature. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. Lastly, it is submitted that five other criminal cases are pending against the petitioner; however, he has already been acquitted in one of them, namely Maranchi P.S. Case No. 43 of 2012. The petitioner has been in custody since 24-01-2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM III, Barh in connection with Pachmahla P. S. Case No. 03 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed 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) that one of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother,
4/4 sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse (iv) that 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 and (v) that the petitioner will appear before the S.H.O of concerned PS every fortnightly to mark his attendance till conclusion of the trial.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J) shyambihari/- U T