Sumant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31372 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2025 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna ====================================================== Sumant Kumar S/O Pramod Kumar Village- Shivnar, Ward No.- 4 P.S.- Mokama District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 106 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1) and 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. On the fateful day, while the son of the informant went along with the petitioner to bring back his money and when he did not contacted with his father for a long time, the father of the victim made a call but he found that his son was not in a position to speak. Later on, he found his son near the Shivnar Halt in an injured position, who disclosed that the petitioner along with others have assaulted him by means of butt of pistol and lathi and iron rod, due to which he sustained severe
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31372 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/3 injuries.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that in fact on account of a dispute involving money transaction, the name of the petitioner along with others have been implicated in this case in order to wreck vengeance and mount pressure. It is the petitioner, who has taken the injured to the hospital where his treatment was done. The injured himself is a boy of bad character, indulge in eve teasing and other immoral acts. Learned Advocate for the petitioner further contended that the informant is not an eyewitness to the alleged occurrence and only in order to extort money from the petitioner, the present FIR has been instituted.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that apart from the serious allegation of assault, the petitioner bears seven criminal antecedent besides the present one.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the specific nature of accusation and the criminal antecedent, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected.
8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31372 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 3/3 Court below, preferably within a period of four weeks, from today, the learned Court shall consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, without being prejudice of the order of this Court. (Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U T