Rohit Baba @ Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24159 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2024 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rohit Baba @ Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Pandey S/O Subhash Pandey @ Sri Subhas Pandey Resident of village- Siswa P.S.- Dumariyaghat District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary corrections in paragraph-1 of the bail application.
2. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Md. Shakir Ahmad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 25.06.2025 in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 384 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 19.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
4. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 19.11.2024 at about 12.15 P.M, three unknown
2/4 people came to his CSP Centre on a white Apache motorcycle and on point of pistol took away about Rs.2 Lakh cash lying in the cash counter, fired in the air and fled towards west.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Initially the petitioner was not named in the FIR and his name transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, Sameer Singh @ Sonu Kumar and thereafter the police remanded the petitioner in the present case, while he was in judicial custody in connection with Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 180 of 2023 and except the disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He next submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and till date no TIP has been conducted by the prosecution. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries five criminal antecedents other
3/4 than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in three cases and two cases are pending for consideration before competent court of law.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 384 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 any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
4/4 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) Suruchi/- U T