Ram Krishna Singh @ Lal Krishna Singh @ Dhuman Singh @ Dhunmun Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88328 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2024 Thana- IMADPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ram Krishna Singh @ Lal Krishna Singh @ Dhuman Singh @ Dhunmun Singh Son of Late Ram Gyan Singh Resident of village -Dhokaranhan (Dhokhrah), Police Station- Imadpur, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-04-2025 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 18.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have committed the murder of the husband of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88328 of 2024(4) dt.19-04-2025 2/3 appears from the F.I.R. that the informant on the basis of suspicion has falsely implicated the name of the petitioner and apart from that nothing has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and even no one has seen the occurrence. He further submits that except suspicion, no other cogent material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and nothing has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence except suspicion, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88328 of 2024(4) dt.19-04-2025 3/3 the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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 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) Ibrar//- U T