Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25611 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2024 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rahul Kumar son of Raj Kumar sahani Resident of Village- Pundar, P.S.- Madhuban, District-East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 05-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024 in a case registered for an offence punishable under Sections 309(6) BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant gave his written statement before Officer In-charge of Kalyanpur Police Station that on 04.07.2024 when his nephew Ritesh Kumar Sharma was on his way to office as soon as he reached at Semra Bazaar over bridge, in the meantime, three miscreants riding on motorcycle overtook him and snatched his motorcycle and mobile phone on the point of knife and fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25611 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR, infact, name of the petitioner has been surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Shivam Kumar. He next submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He next submits that investigation has already been concluded and chargesheet has been submitted but no TIP has been conducted during the investigation. Petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2024. He next submits that petitioner has got two criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the fact petitioner is not named in the FIR, infact, name of the petitioner has been surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Shivam Kumar and also the fact that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, on his furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25611 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with P.S. Case No.205 of 2024 with a condition that the petitioner shall physically present before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Harshita/- U T