Dismissed

Pintu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh @ Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Babua v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Feb 2022CR. MISC./28231/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna dismissed an application for regular bail. The applicant, facing charges of dacoity and violating the Arms Act, was denied bail due to being a habitual offender and an active gang member, with the court choosing to defer the bail petition for one year.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail dismissed; petitioner permitted to renew prayer for bail after one year.

Pintu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh @ Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Babua… — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28231 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2018 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

PINTU KUMAR SINGH @ SONU SINGH @ RAJESH KUMAR SINGH @ BABUA Son of Shiv Shankar Singh Resident of Village- Nun Golba, Police Station- Mohiuddin Nagar, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 24-02-2022

¶11

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jandaha Police Station Case No. 312 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 396/397/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶13

The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that two miscreants arrived near the shop of the informant on a motorcycle and one of them entered into the shop of the informant and on the point of gun, took away the cash box of the shop and started fleeing away, but the staff of the informant, working in the shop, chased the miscreants and snatched the cash box from them and, then, the accused persons

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28231 of 2021(4) dt.24-02-2022 2/3

¶15

fired several bullets from their pistols upon the staff, namely, Pankaj, and after that both the accused persons fled away with the cash box containing Rs. 40,000-50,000/-. It has further been stated that the staff of the informant succumbed to the injuries in course of treatment.

¶16

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Rahul Kumar and the petitioner has not been put on Test Identification Parade.

¶17

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, referring to the contents of the case diary, submits that the petitioner is a history-sheeter and altogether seven criminal cases of similar nature of offence are pending against him. He further submits that the petitioner is an active member of the gang, which is involved in the offence of loot and/or some other serious crime relating thereto.

¶18

From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that while rejecting the bail application of the petitioner, the learned 11^th Additional Sessions judge, Vaishali, at Hajipur, had arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent of similar nature of offence and from the record of the case, it

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28231 of 2021(4) dt.24-02-2022 3/3

¶20

appears that the petitioner is an active member of the gang, which is involved in committing loot or some others serious crime and if he is released on bail, the life and property of common people of the society will be at stake.

¶21

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, I am not inclined to differ with the findings of the learned 11^th Additional Sessions Judge, Vaishali, at Hajipur, and the fact that the petitioner is a hostory-sheeter involved in several criminal cases of similar nature of offence and the seriousness of the allegation levelled in the First Information Report, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage.

¶22

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶23

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after one year from today, if the trial does not show any progress.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶25

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶26

U Ț T √

Pintu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh @ Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Babua v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh @ Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Babua 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

Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Sao Vs The State of Bihar

Dilip Mahto @ Dilip Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Arbind Mahto @ Bhagat Jee @ Guhan Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Mahto @ Shyam Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Sharwan Kumar Gond @ Sharwan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Kanhaiya Kumar Ray @ Kanhaiya Ray Vs The State of Bihar