Vikash Kumar @ Jaddu @ Ankur Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53800 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2020 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna ====================================================== Vikash Kumar @ Jaddu @ Ankur Pratap Singh S/O Late Ram Kumar Singh R/O Vill.- Tarwan, P.S.- Naubatpur, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 12.09.2024, in connection with Ranitalab P.S. Case No. 272 of 2020, FIR dated 16.12.2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 456, 504, 506, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 16.12.2020, while he was sitting near his door, he heard knocking and someone asking for Manoj Kumar. Suddenly, co-accused persons along with the petitioner, entered his house armed. Anand Singh fired at the informant, causing injury to his right leg. The accused then searched for the

2/5 informant's son, Manoj Singh, but not finding him, they left the house, fired shots outside, and fled on motorcycles along with three unknown persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.09.2024 and it appears from the F.I.R. that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and specific allegation of firing is attributed against the co-accused persons, namely, Anand Singh, Divyanshu Kumar and Manish Kumar. He further submits that the petitioner's name has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused persons, namely, Jeevan Yadav, Dibyanshu Kumar and Biru Kumar. He further submits that the similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Munim Sharma @ Ragish Sharma @ Rajnish Sharma has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.01.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

42669 of 2021, another co-accused person, namely, Biru Kumar has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.02.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43497 of 2021, another co-accused person, namely, Shashi Bhushan Kumar @ Shashi Bhushan @ Chhotu has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

3/5 accused person, namely, Dibyanshu Kumar @ Anshu @ Dibyanshu Kumar Sharma has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.04.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18152 of 2022, another co-accused person, namely, Jeevan Yadav has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.02.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 41673 of 2022 and Devanshu Kumar @ Dewanshu Kumar @ Chhotu has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5294 of 2024 respectively and the police after investigation submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 12.09.2024.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that he is on bail in the pending matters.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., the petitioner's name has been transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person and similarly situated co-accused persons

4/5 have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the person who has confessed the name of the petitioner has also been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, let the petitioner, above-named, be released 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Danapur, Patna in connection with Ranitalab P.S. Case No. 272 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:

(i). Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the learned trial Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the learned trial Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the learned trial Court.

(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 learned trial Court 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 learned trial Court shall take step

5/5 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) Neha/- U T