Pintu Singh @ Vinay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27843 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6564 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Pintu Singh @ Vinay Kumar Singh S/o Late Bharat Singh R/o Village - Damodarpur, P.S - Rosera, District - Samastipur Bihar - 848210 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Nandan Priyadarshi S/o Late Shayam Narayan Mahto R/o - Ghaghaa Ghat Road, P.S - Sultanganj, District - Patna, Bihar - 800006 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nishant Kumar, Advocate :
Mr. Prashant Kumar, Advocate :
Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 29-04-2026 Heard Mr. Nishant Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nandan Priyadarshi, the complainant who is appearing in person beside learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.6564(C) of 2023 in which cognizance has been taken under section 384 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the complaint, the complainant alleged that during the court hours, the petitioner alongwith other accused came at his Vakalatkhana but due to the election in the District
2/4 Bar Association, he remain seated there till evening. As he started his journey towards a motorcycle shop to purchase a new motorcycle alongwith heavy cash, the allegation is that this petitioner alongwith other accused again came and near the western side of the B.N. College, on the point of pistols, took away Rupees One Lakh from his son's pocket. The alarm raised by the complainant led to others come to the place but that time the accused managed to escape. He went to the Pirbahore Police Station but there saw the Sub-Inspector talking with the accused and as such, he returned and then the complaint filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts which have not been incorporated in the complaint is that he is a trustee as well as teacher in the school called DMP Holy Mission School which is being operated from the premises owned by the complainant on rental basis.
5. As he wanted the premises to be vacated, the petitioner wanted some time to shift the school but he was not ready to give that time and as a counter blast this complaint.
6. The complainant as recorded above, is appearing and according to him the occurrence took place and as he found the Police to be conversing with the accused, he chose to file complaint. Further, the accused has criminal antecedent which
3/4 was earlier suppressed before the learned Sessions Judge.
7. This Court has gone through the facts of the case and the complaint beside hearing the parties, the case is there, the petitioner shall be facing the music, though the complainant submits that criminal antecedent was suppressed by the petitioner before the learned Sessions Judge, he has also chosen not to record the facts that the petitioner is a tenant in his premises, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class-XIV, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No.6564(C) of 2023 subject to the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for cooperating in the
4/4 investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every month for next six months to mark his attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds; (v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T