Patna High CourtCR. MISC./72759/2025bail granted

Baban Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-09Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72759 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2019 Thana- KOTWALI District- Munger ====================================================== Baban Singh, Son of Late Onkar Nath Singh @ Onkar Singh, Resident of Village - Manjura, Police Station - Tetiya Bambar, District - Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

Manoj Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ram Lagan Singh, Resident of Village - Vikrampur, Dariyapur, Police Station - Dharhara, District - Munger. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pathak, Adv.

Mr. Surya Narayan Sah, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 348 of 2019 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 170 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that one Kunal Singh introduced himself as the P.A. of one of the Members of the Parliament and demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- for providing a job in the Municipal Corporation, Munger. It is further alleged that the said person has cheated him using the name of Brajesh Kumar @ Bambam Singh and he

2/4 has also realized money from several persons on the pretext of providing them jobs.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and it is in the course of investigation that the main accused, namely, Brajesh Kumar @ Bambam Singh has taken the name of the petitioner. It has been submitted that the petitioner was not aware of him being implicated as an accused in the present case and hence, could not appear earlier and in the meantime, almost all the coaccused persons have been granted bail in the present matter, the orders of which have been brought on record by way of Annexure-P/2 series. It has further been submitted that the charge-sheet has already been submitted against the petitioner and petitioner is ready to abide by the directions of this Court and shall make himself available on each and every date of trial. It has lastly been submitted that though the petitioner carries long list of antecedents of nine cases against his name, but he is on bail in all such cases and he is in custody since 04.03.2025.

5. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner had absconded for almost five years and hence, he does not deserve the liberty of bail.

3/4

6. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond 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 Kotwali P.S. Case No. 348 of 2019, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative and the other shall be a local resident. (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation. (iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned Court.

(iv) If the petitioner, in future, is found to be involved in similar nature of offence(s), the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

(v) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. (vi) In view of the antecedent of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Superintendent

4/4 of Police, Munger within fifteen (15) days of his release with a copy of this order and every two weeks thereafter for the next nine months. The conduct of the petitioner will be kept under watch in this period by the concerned Superintendent of Police and if it is found wanting in any respect, a report shall be made to the Court concerned by him to initiate a proceeding for cancellation of bail of the petitioner for reasons of misuse of bail. After reporting to the Superintendent of Police, a certificate will be filed by the petitioner before the Court concerned.

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Praveen-II/- U T