Allowed

Rohit Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Jan 2021CR. MISC./32224/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court, in a bail application, granted release to the petitioner Rajasthan involved in a dacoity case under IPC Sections 399/402 and The Arms Act, conditioned on furnishing bonds of Rs. 25,000 each with two relatives as sureties and ensuring appearance in court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount and complying with conditions of good behaviour and appearance.

Rohit Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32224 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS Case No.-132 Year-2020 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rohit Kumar Singh, Male, aged about 35 years, Son of Sri Jawahar Singh, Resident of Village-Kenduar, PS-Amarpur, District-Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Arif, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

¶11

ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-01-2021

¶12

Heard Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Arif, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Amarpur (Fullidumar) PS Case No. 132 of 2020 dated 05.03.2020, instituted under Sections 399/402 of the Indian Penal Code and 25 (1-B) (a)/26/35 of The Arms Act, 1959.

¶14

The petitioner is alleged to have been one of the two persons who had called the two persons caught with illegal firearms and cartridges, for committing dacoity in UCO Bank.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is innocent and runs a grille shop and only on the so-called

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32224 of 2020 dt.06-01-2021 2/3

¶17

confessional statement of co-accused Praveen Kumar Singh has been made accused. It was submitted that because the said coaccused Praveen Kumar Singh has some dispute with regard to payment relating to some grille work which he had done, his name has also been taken. Learned counsel submitted that there is no recovery from him. It was further submitted that though the petitioner is accused in one more case but in that also there has been no recovery from him and he has also been granted bail in the same. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2020.

¶18

Learned APP submitted that the accused who was caught has taken the name of the petitioner as the person who had run away.

¶19

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in Amarpur (Fullidumar) PS Case No. 132 of 2020, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32224 of 2020 dt.06-01-2021 3/3

¶21

petitioner, and (iii) that the petitioner shall also give an undertaking to the Court that he shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity, act in violation of any law/statutory provisions, tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. The petitioner shall cooperate in the case and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to cooperate or being absent on two consecutive dates, without sufficient cause, shall also lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶22

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.

¶23

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

¶24

Anand Kr.

¶25

AFR/NAFR U T

Rohit Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Azad Vs The State of Bihar

Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhanannjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rekha Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nandu Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Kailash Prasad Vs The State of Bihar