Raju Kumar Singh @ Tiger Singh @ Tiger v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22588 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2023 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Raju Kumar Singh @ Tiger Singh @ Tiger S/o Late Biresh Singh @ late Viresh Singh R/o Village- Sadar, P.S.- Barauli, District- Gopalganj. At present R/o Vill- Kalyanpur Madhubani, Jogiraha, P.S.- Sidhwaliya, Dist- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 22-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 113/2023 registered for the offences under Section 302/34 of I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the husband of the informant was taken to tilak ceremony by the petitioner and one other accused namely Jitendra Singh. It has further been stated that the petitioner thereafter did not return and despite search being conducted, he could not be traced. Subsequently, on the next day i.e., on 10.03.2023, the body of the informant's husband was found in a pond.

2/4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to some personal difference between the parties. Learned counsel further submits that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and merely on suspicion the petitioner has been named in the present case. Even during the course of investigation, there is no concrete evidence to connect the petitioner with the said occurrence. Most importantly, the date of occurrence was 19.03.2023 and the body was recovered on 10.03.2023, however, the FIR was lodged as an afterthought on 12.03.2023 in the evening. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 11.09.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it was the petitioner who had taken the informant's husband to the tilak ceremony.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and the petitioner was arrested merely on the ground of suspicion,

3/4 let the petitioner above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gopalganj in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 113/2023 subject to the conditions :- a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

b. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

c. The petitioner shall not approach the informant or any of the family members or the victim girl to either coerce or threaten during the pendency of the trial.

d. In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to the cancelled by the court concerned.

e. 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 afore-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) tusharika/- U T