Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kr. Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56108 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR GRP CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== Rahul Singh @ Rahul kr. Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh son of Ashok Singh Village- Jurawanpur (Karari), Ps- Jurawanpur, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Katihar G.R. P.S. Case No. 118 of 2024 dated 27.04.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section/s 341, 323, 353, 504, 506, 34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the accusation against the petitioner is of assaulting two police constables, while the team was inspecting the pantry car.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that merely because the petitioner is said to be the Manager of the pantry car of Mahananda Express, the police officials of GRP police station, Katihar is said to have implicated the petitioner on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56108 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026 2/3 basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Saddam, while there is nothing incriminating to find his complicity in the commission of alleged offence.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the incident is said to have taken place owing to forcible taking food from the pantry car by the police officials without making payment for the same and, on demand of money, they are said to have been threaten to implicate in a false case.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application but, does not dispute the fact with regard to there being no specific allegation in the F.I.R., while the name of the petitioner is said to have been transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused.

7. Be that as it may, considering the fact that there is nothing specific against the petitioner and is a person of clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rail (Rly), Katihar in connection with Katihar G.R. P.S. Case No. 118 of 2024,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56108 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026 3/3 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

(Ajit Kumar, J) rishi/- U T