Haridwar Singh @ Haridwar Singh Kushwaha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26541 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2024 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Haridwar Singh @ Haridwar Singh Kushwaha son of Late Sukhlal Singh Village- Kargahar , PS- Kargahar , Dist -Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Anuj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-05-2025 Heard Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anuj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 210 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 28.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant gave Rs. 29 lakhs to the petitioner to pay the same to the land owner but the petitioner only pays Rs. 20 lakhs to the land owner and rest amount of Rs. 9 lakhs was grabbed by him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

2/4 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the informant has already filed Money Suit No. 2 of 2024 for the same set of allegations as mentioned in the present F.I.R against the petitioner which is pending for consideration before the competent Court of law. Apart from that learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not received any amount from the informant and even the informant is not in a position to produce any chit of paper which suggest that the petitioner has received any amount from the informant.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent, there is no chit of paper which suggest that the petitioner has received any amount from the informant and apart from that the informant has filed money suit for the same set of allegation as alleged in the present F.I.R, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days

3/4 from the date of receipt of the order, 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 Sub-Judge-XII cum Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IV, Sasaram, District- Rohtas in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 210 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other 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 criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

4/4 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) Vanisha/- U T