← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./79626/2025bail granted

Gopal Kumar Singh @ Gopal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-29Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79626 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- AYARKOTHA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Gopal Kumar Singh @ Gopal Kumar S/O Deenanath Singh R/O VillageBabhanpurwa, P.S.- Sasaram(M), District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 Heard Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.05.2025 in connection with Ayarkotha P.S. Case No.08 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.01.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4),316(2) of BNS,2023.

3. The case of the prosecution is in written report of one Radhe Shyam Prasad, who states that he is a businessman engaged in purchase and sale of food grains with GSTIN No. 10AGSPP1626KIZA. On 04.11.2025, he states to have hired a truck from Rudra Road Lines bearing Registration No. BR24GB5181 and loaded rice weighing 308.20 Kg costing around Rs. 961584/-, for conveyance to Modern Agro

2/4 Industries, Bahraich (U.P.). The truck did not arrive to the destination till 09.01.2024. The driver of the truck (the petitioner) was contacted whose mobile was found switched off. The information was transmitted to Ranjit Singh, the transporter. Ranjit Singh said that he would contact the owner of the vehicle. Then he, the transporter did not answer appropriately and the consignment did not arrive at the destination till 11.01.2025. It is alleged that the petitioner transporter Ranjit Singh and owner of the vehicle Prince Kumar have eloped the consignment.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground that he is driver of the vehicle in question and the petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged occurrence. The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the basis of the material available on the record and the case diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner has sold the goods which was found in the truck in question and apart from the aforesaid, the petitioner carries one more case

3/4 other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.-1st Class, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Ayarkotha P.S. Case No.08 of 2025, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the 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

4/4 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T