Bare Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31248 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2019 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== Bare Singh, S/o Bachcha Singh, R/o Village- Neknamtola, P.S.- Barhara, District- Bhojpur (Ara) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No.110 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant along with his father, namely, Shankar Dayal @ Fauji was harvesting crop on 13.04.2019 at 11 O' clock. In the meantime, the petitioner along with other accused persons of this case armed with daab and rifle reached there. All the accused persons brutally assaulted the father of the informant by daab on his face and neck and murdered. The incident has been done by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31248 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 2/3 the accused persons to maintain superiority over in that area.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that in this case two accused persons, namely, Ram Lal Singh and Birendra Rai have been granted bail by the trail court itself. The trial court has held that "there is general and omnibus allegation against accused petitioner that he murdered father of informant along with 9 other accused persons by daab. Statement of the informant has not been recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. during investigation. Prosecution witnesses mentioned at para 6, 7, 8, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the case diary have supported the case of the prosecution but they did not name the petitioner".
In Second order also, the trial court has held that "there is general and omnibus allegation against the accused petitioner". From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that though the trial court has held that there is allegation against the petitioner that he along with others assaulted the father of the informant with daab on his face and neck due to which he died but has not discussed as to how did he differ from his previous two orders.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31248 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 3/3 against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of this petitioner stands on similar footing. Without considering the order of the trial court from perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is clear that the nature of allegation is general and omnibus. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.02.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Saran at Chapra in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 110 of 2019.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T