Rahul Singh @ Rahul Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28482 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1062 Year-2017 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== Rahul Singh @ Rahul Prasad S/O Suresh Singh Resident of Village- Bhithi Shabudin, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Raju Singh S/O Shri Shivnath Singh R/O Vill. and Post.- Devdhi Takt, P.S.- Tariya, Dist.- Saran, Present Address- Sarkari Gachhi Dhenusg, Post and P.s.- Madhaura, Dist.- Saran.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chhote Lal Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 384, 427, 392 and 34 of the I.P.C.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the complainant alleges that he is an LIC agent, further on 29-3-2017 Santosh, Sunil and Pintu called from mobile of the petitioner and asked the complainant to come as they intended to take a policy, the complainant accordingly came to the place of occurrence where all the accused assaulted him with fist and slap and Santosh took out

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28482 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2 his cheque book on point of pistol and took his signature on three cheque leaf.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the complainant. It is also submitted that the allegation does not inspire confidence for the reason that it does not appear probable that three persons will have called from a mobile asking the complainant to come to a particular place. It is next submitted that even the mobile number of the petitioner has not been disclosed. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

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. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Complaint Case No. 1062 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T