Vijay Singh @Vijay Prakash Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64188 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-711 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Vijay Singh @Vijay Prakash Singh S/o Late Vashist Narayan Singh Resident of Village- Ratanpur, Ward No. 21, Police Station - Ratanpur, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the case was taken up on 15.09.2025, when a submission was made on behalf of the informant that informant had already returned an amount of Rs.14,28,000/- to the petitioner but still the petitioner along with other accused were pressuring him to return the amount or in lieu whereof to execute a sale deed with respect to his land at a lower price.
2/5
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that deceased had not returned an amount of Rs.14,28,000/- rather had returned an amount of Rs.14,60,000/-. It is also submitted that on 15.09.2025, a submission was made on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner had given a loan of Rs.10 lacs to the deceased but the said submission was made inadvertently, when the petitioner had given a loan of more than Rs.25 lacs. It is next submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her father on 04.12.2023 committed suicide on account of harassment and torture meted out by the accused persons, further for the last 7-8 months, petitioner, Rohit, Kalu and Ritesh along with unknown accused used to come to her house and abused her father, brother and other family members and demanded money and used to torture her father for not returning the money and pressurized him to sell his land at a lower price and threatened to kill her father and brother, thus her father was not able to suffer the torture and thus ended his life.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is that petitioner and other accused persons abetted in suicide of his father. The learned counsel next submits that no doubt, father of the informant i.e. deceased had returned an amount of Rs.14,60,000/- to the
3/5 petitioner but thereafter had issued two cheques of Rs.4,75,000/- and Rs.8 lacs dated 05.05.2023 and 19.10.2023 but then both the cheques on presentation for encashment bounced. It is submitted that since the deceased had issued cheques worth Rs.12,75,000/- apart from Rs.14,60,000/- which he had returned that amply demonstrates that petitioner had given money by way of loan to the deceased of an amount more than Rs.27 lacs. It is next submitted that since the petitioner had given the money by way of loan to the deceased when he needed it and when the time of returning the amount came, cheques were issued which bounced on account of which the petitioner used to go to the house of the informant for seeking his money back, which is also reflected from the allegations as alleged in the FIR.
6. Learned APP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that deceased had left a suicide note also wherein he had stated that petitioner along with named accused persons used to come to his house and threatened him for executing sale deed with respect to his land at a lower price and he was not able to suffer the torture, thus is committing suicide. The said submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is rebutted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf
4/5 of the petitioner and it is submitted that no doubt, a suicide note was left by the deceased but then the same did not record the correct facts rather the suicide note was left with an intention to implicate the petitioner along with others. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant at this stage submits that in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond and thus will not cooperate in the investigation, on which, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.711/2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. Further, one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his son, namely, Prankur Kumar.
9. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
5/5 Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T