Sant Kumar Das @ Sant Das @ Sant Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35698 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2024 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== Sant Kumar Das @ Sant Das @ Sant Ravidas S/o Sahdeo Ravidas Resident of Village - Teliyadih, P.S. - Jhajha, District - Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Laxmipur P.S. Case No.202 of 2024, for allegedly having committed offence under Section 394 of Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to the effect that on 07.06.2024 at about 13:50 hours, while the informant was going to Anantpur Bank from Tal Jhari with collection officer Dharmendra Ravidas after collection of money, a white coloured Swift Dezire car overtook him and stopped him. Some persons came out of the car, wearing masks, started assaulting the informant with lathi and danda and when the informant's colleague, namely, Dharmendra Ravidas came
2/4 for his rescue, two more persons, having covered their faces with masks came out of the car. One of them was armed with pistol and he put the same on the informant's head and snatched the mobile phone, key of bike and cash to the tune of Rs.17,750/- along with some other documents. The accused persons fled away towards Guguldih by car.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. The name of the petitioner transpired in the present case on the basis of the confessional statement made by co-accused Vipin Kumar Das. Nothing has been recovered from the petitioner and petitioner has got a clean antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that similarly situated co-accused Lalan Das @ Lalan has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Hon'ble Single Judge of this court vide order dated 20.06.2025, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 33973 of 2025.
5. Per Contra, the learned APP appearing on behalf of the state opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of confessional statement made by one of the co-accused and petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory
3/4 bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going through the records, it appears that the petitioner was not named in the First Informant Report. His name transpired during course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement given by co-accused, Vipin Kumar Das. Further, one of the co-accused, namely, Lalan Das @ Lalan has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 33973 of 2025. Further, the petitioner has got a clean antecedent.
7. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Jamui in connection with Laxmipur P.S. Case No.202 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with a further condition that:- The learned court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found
4/4 that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Ritesh Kumar, J.) Sanjay/Shital U T