Suraj Kumar @ Vishal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32982 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Suraj Kumar @ Vishal Kumar S/o Satyanarayan Rai R/o Village- Bazidpur Saidat, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-05-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner makes a prayer for bail in connection with Bidupur P.S Case No.143 of 2025 registered for offences under Section 304 of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The First Information Report discloses a story that while the informant Aman Kumar was going to his house by e-rickshaw, suddenly two persons boarded on a motorcycle, snatched the mobile phone of the informant and due to vehicle check by Police, the accused persons left the motorcycles and fled away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First Information Report has been lodged against unknown and the petitioner was arrested after five days when the Police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32982 of 2025(2) dt.22-05-2025 2/3 reached the house on suspicion for the stolen mobile phone and the said mobile phone was recovered from his possession, as has transpired during the course of the investigation. However, learned counsel for the petitioner denies the said recovery of the mobile phone from his possession. Further, it is also to be noted that the petitioner has confessed his guilt during the course of investigation. However, the same would have no evidentiary value. It has further been submitted that the seized motorcycle in question do not belong to the present petitioner. The petitioner is a 19 year old boy who is lying in custody since 24.02.2025.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner invites the attention of this Court to the fact that even in the bail rejection order, the learned court below had given the liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charges. It has been submitted that the charges have been framed in the present case.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail application.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32982 of 2025(2) dt.22-05-2025 3/3 amount, each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Bidupur P.S Case No.143 of 2025, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation/trial.
8. However, the bail of the petitioner would only be accepted on the condition that the charges have been framed in this case and however, if the charges have not been framed in this case, the present order will not take effect. (Soni Shrivastava, J) sharun/- U T