Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28705 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-356 Year-2022 Thana- KUMAR KHAND District- Madhepura ====================================================== Rahul Kumar S/O Harinandan Prasad Yadav @ Harinandan Yadav R/o Village- Kewatgama, Police Station- Kumarkhand, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Digvijay Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard Mr.Digvijay Narayan Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kumarkhand P.S. Case No.356 of 2022, dated 18.10.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365,302,201,120(B)/34 of IPC.

3. The son of the informant is alleged to have been killed by the petitioner in connivance with other accused persons.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. In fact the father of the deceased has lodged a Sanha on 15.10.2022 in which he has not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28705 of 2025(3) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 stated anything about the petitioner and when he has filed the present FIR he has stated that the petitioner has called the victim and name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of suspicion and except the suspicion, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence even the CDR location not suggested that the petitioner was in touch with any other co-accused person.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent and except the suspicion, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days 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 learned District and Sessions Judge, Madhepura in connection with Kumarkhand P.S. Case No.356 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28705 of 2025(3) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 Criminal Procedure 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her 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/her 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) Nitesh/- U T