Varun Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37795 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2024 Thana- PURNAHYA District- Sheohar ====================================================== Varun Kumar Singh S/o Ram Sogarath Singh R/o Village- Chairaiya, P.S.- Purnahiya, District- Sheohar .. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .. ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2025 Heard Mr.Rakesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.04.2025 in connection with Purnahiya P.S. Case No.85 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 21.08.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 130(1),3(5) of BNS.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant alleged that the petitioner along with other coaccused persons assaulted the informant and his father due to which his father sustained injury and later on he died.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from
2/4 the FIR that although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted by means of knife upon the informant and his father but from a bare perusal of the postmortem report of the deceased (Annexure-3) which suggests that there is no injury was found on the person of the deceased and apart from that, the injury report is not available of the informant which suggests that he has not received any injury and from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that due to admitted land dispute, the present occurrence had taken place and co-accused person, namely, Rambabu Singh has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 17.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.80803 of 2024 and co-accused person, namely, Arun Kumar has been granted bail by the learned court below itself and the petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and apart from that, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR.
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, petitioner has clean antecedent, due to admitted land dispute, the present occurrence had taken place and the allegation as alleged in the FIR is not supported by the medical evidence (postmortem report), let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Sheohar in connection with Purnahiya P.S. Case No.85 of 2024, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in
4/4 case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T