Kampany Kumar @ Sanjeet Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27128 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2021 Thana- Dehri Mufassil District- Rohtas ====================================================== Kampany Kumar @ Sanjeet Singh S/O Bindu Yadav R/O Village- Debariya, P.S- Dehri Mufassil, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-05-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 26.06.2021, the petitioner and Abhishek took his father on a motorcycle on pretext of some work, but his father did not return, hence a search was made, but his father was not found, accordingly, the informant on 27.06.2021 inquired from the petitioner with regard to whereabouts of his father when the petitioner disclosed that his father, on the same day, has left for his house, it is next alleged that on 28.06.2021, the dead body of
2/4 his father was recovered from Kau river, thus alleges that the accused persons committed murder of his father.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the FIR does not even remotely suggest the motive for the occurrence. It is further submitted that petitioner and Abhishek had taken the father of the informant for agricultural work and thereafter his father left. It is also submitted that had the petitioner been involved in the occurrence then he would not have been at his place, but then from perusal of the FIR itself, it would manifest that when informant came to the house of the petitioner, he was present there and he disclosed that his father had left. It is next submitted that the entire allegation hinges around suspicion.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not disputed rather stands admitted is that father of the informant died and from order impugned, it would manifest that the cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia due to drowning, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that it might be a possibility that petitioner might have gone to take bath in the river and he drowned. The learned APP
3/4 next submits that in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dehri Mufassil P.S. Case No. 69 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8. It is further made clear that if charge sheet is
4/4 submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence, in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T