Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38263 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2022 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar S/o Vinod Sahani Village-Konwa Chitarpatti P.S.-Minapur (Panapur) District-Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 06-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that while he was returning home from Bazar, he was intercepted by four miscreants who snatched away his mobile, Rs. 18,000/- and golden chain. It is further alleged that petitioner had been calling each other with their respective names in which the name of the petitioner was also being taken. It is further alleged that the said miscreants then further snatched a mobile phone from one another victim, namely,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38263 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/3 Mukesh Kumar Yadav and Rs. 15,000/- from Ankit Raj.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It has been submitted that the petitioner was not apprehended at the place of occurrence although a recovery of a mobile phone of the informant is said to have been made from his possession. Learned counsel further submits that the chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of the petitioner of tampering with the evidence. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has one criminal case against his name and is in custody since 28.02.2025 in the present case.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, 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 the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection Rajepur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative and the other shall be local resident. (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38263 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 3/3 (iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned. (iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T