Abhinav Kumar @ Sonu Singh And ANR. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50192 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -178 Year- 2012 Thana -RUNISAIDPUR District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Abhinav Kumar @ Sonu Singh

2. Amit Kumar @ Ranu Singh Both son of Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh and are resident of Village Bairia, Baikuunthpuri, P.S. Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2016 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 178 of 2012 for offences alleged under Sections 384, 386, 387 of the Indian Penal Code. Diary in the present case was called for which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R but subsequently on the basis of confessional statement made by one Rishi Kumar Jha, before the Police, these petitioners have been roped in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that though the houses of the petitioners were raided, no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50192 of 2015 (3) dt.12-01-2016 2/3 incriminating material was seized/found from the said place and that two vehicles which were alleged to have been recovered were parked much away in the lane beside the house of these petitioners. He further submits that all through the case diary, save and except the confessional statement made by Rishi Kumar Jha before the Police, there is no further any cogent material on record so as to connect these petitioners with the offence as alleged. Learned counsel Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, appearing on behalf of the State submits that the call detail records of the Mobile No. of the said Rishi Kumar Jha indicated that he had been in continuous contact with another person, namely, Mukesh Pathak, whose Mobile no. is 9708282328 and this number had been continuous contact with the mobile no of the said Rishi Kumar Jha bearing mobile no. 9576996924. Theses two numbers have no connection with the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the vehicles recovered beside the lane of the house of the petitioners are also not found in the name of these petitioners. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances and also the fact that these petitioners have no criminal antecedents, let the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50192 of 2015 (3) dt.12-01-2016 3/3 of 4 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 178 of 2012, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjana Mishra, J) sunil/- U T