Bablu Kumar @ Babloo Kumar @ Dablu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65611 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2021 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Bablu Kumar @ Babloo Kumar @ Dablu S/o Ramdarshan Singh Yadav @ Ramdarash Singh R/o Village - Ahirauli, P.S - Shivsagar, District - Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sasaram (T) P.S.Case No. 145 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 419, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has stated that one Milan Kumar and Dablu Kumar ( petitioner) have seduced him for financing a vehicle. It is further alleged that they utilized the Aadhar card, Pan card and other documents of the informant and took him to DBS Automobile Pvt Ltd, and took his signature on various papers and thereafter, he was said that he shall be receiving the vehicle in April next year. It has further been alleged that the informant received a call whereby
2/4 he was demanded the installment of the loan for the vehicle. The informant inquired the matter, he came to know that the petitioner and other have mis-utillized the document and had forced him to lodge the FIR for theft of the vehicle and thereafter, the present FIR was lodged.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and he has no concern whatsoever with the informant. It has further been submitted that the petitioner was not aware of lodging of the present FIR which was lodged in the year 2021 and the co-accused Milan Kumar has already been facing the trial and merely because his name is Dablu Kumar that he is being implicated in the present case at the behest of the police though even as per the FIR, the accused Dablu Kumar is said to be arrested from Buxar while the petitioner happens to be the resident of Rohtas. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that from perusal of the impugned order it would be evident that supplementary case diary submitted in this case shows that even one installment has been paid on behalf of the informant and therefore, it is the informant, who is trying to shy away from playing the law and in order to save his own skin, he has lodged the present FIR, falsely levelling allegation against the
3/4 petitioner and others. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sasaram (T) P.S.Case No.145 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of
4/4 the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned Court below 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 court below shall take step 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. (Sourendra Pandey, J) N.K/- U T