Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52702 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sonu Kumar S/o Bhushan Rai @ Bhunesh Ray, R/o Village- Diwantok, Ward No. 9, PS- Ganga Bridge, Distt- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Priya Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Earlier the petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of regular bail in Cr. Misc. No. 33022 of 2025, which was rejected vide order dated 26.05.2025 with a liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. Now, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail after charges have been framed.
4. As per the prosecution case, the FIR discloses that three unknown persons have looted an amount of Rs. 1,22,484/- from the informant along with a mobile and some
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52702 of 2025(2) dt.22-08-2025 2/3 other articles which were kept in the bag along with the collected money.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR was lodged against unknown and the name of the petitioner has transpired during the course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Vishal Kumar. He further submits that it has been mentioned in the said confessional statement that the weapon in the said incident and cash were handed over to the present petitioner, who had hidden it in the shop and subsequently the Police recovered the said weapon and the cash from the shop of the petitioner. He next submits that till date no test identification parade has been conducted in the case to establish the complicity of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent and he is on bail in the said case as mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.
He next submits that the coaccused persons namely, Sonu Kumar and Chandan Kumar have been granted bail vide order dated 26.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33022 of 2025. Learned counsel lastly submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.11.2024 and charges have been framed in this case on 23.06.2025.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52702 of 2025(2) dt.22-08-2025 3/3 State, however, vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.11.2024 and charges have already been framed, in view of the liberty earlier granted, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur / successor Court, in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024, on further condition:
(i) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial, and in case of his non-cooperation, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the learned trial Court. (Soni Shrivastava, J) Shahnawaz/- U T