Ashutosh Kumar @ Goni Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30598 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2022 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== ASHUTOSH KUMAR @ GONI SINGH S/o Binay Singh @ Binay Kumar Singh R/o village- Fulaut (Western), Ward No. 01, P.S.- Chausa, DistrictMadhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms.Soni Srivastava, Advocate Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 386, 120(B), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that accused persons, including the petitioner, were trying to create communal disturbance for political reasons, further alleges that on 14.03.2022, the accused persons along with unknown criminals demanded extortion of Rs. 2 lakhs from the informant through mobile number 7488614232 on informant's mobile number 8210833267.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30598 of 2022(2) dt.29-08-2022 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, there is a delay of eight days in instituting the F.I.R. as the date of occurrence is 14.03.2022 and the FIR has been instituted on 21.03.2022, it is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that a person who will commit crime will use his own mobile and thus would create evidence against himself, it is also submitted that the mobile number from which the alleged extortion was demanded does not belong to the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

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 Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Chausa (Fulaut O.P.) P.S. Case No. 58 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T