← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45442/2025bail granted

Aman Kumar @ Aman v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-29Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45442 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2024 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Aman S/O Bumbum Sharma @ Bambum Kumar Sharma Resident of Village- Nauranga Bhagatpur, Bishnupur, Ward no- 13, P.S.- Balia, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sarvottam Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 398/2024 dated 20.12.2024 registered for the offence punishable u/s 318(4), 303(2), 115(2), 308(5), 127(7), 351(2)(3) read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S. and section 66 of the IT Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant is working as Senior Business Development Executive in SBI Life Insurance Company in Simdega, Jharkhand. In that course, the co-accused Amit Kumar gave offer to the informant for a job in TATA AIG Life Insurance at Patna Branch on higher salary. Then the informant reached at Begusarai railway station on

2/4 14.12.2024 from where the co-accused Amit Kumar picked up the informant and took him near Bariyarpur where six coaccused persons were also there. On the instruction of Amit Kumar, the co-accused Golu Kumar pointed pistol on the informant and then the informant on fear gave his mobile, credit card, debit card to the co-accused Golu Kumar. The co-accused Amit Kumar forcibly got mobile password from the informant and transferred money from the mobile of the informant. The co-accused Gobind Kumar also pointed pistol on the informant and got ATM password and after that the co-accused Govind Kumar, Harsh and Amit went to Lakhminia for withdrawing money from the ATM whereas the co-accused persons and the petitioner stayed with the informant and the petitioner Aman Kumar snatched watch from the informant.

The co-accused persons, Harsh and Amit came from Lakhmania and told to kill the informant as they have withdrawn the money. Thereafter, the informant started screaming then the accused persons left him and threatened him not to disclose the matter to anyone or they would kill the whole family of the informant. Further the informant states that the accused persons between 14.12.2024 to 16.12.2024 withdrawn Rs.6,73,000/- from the account of the informant as a loan.

3/4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is only of snatching watch from the informant. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Begusarai in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 398/2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition/s:- (i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

4/4 (ii). If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T