Allowed

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Dec 2023CR. MISC./64454/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to petitioners involved in an IPC assault case, subject to the framing of charges by the trial court. Strict conditions were imposed, including the requirement of family sureties, monthly police station attendance, and prohibitions on inducing witnesses or committing further offences.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted after framing of charge with bonds of Rs. 30,000 each and strict conditions including monthly police station attendance.

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64454 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2018 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh S/O Balistar Singh R/O Village- Kakar Kund, Ps. Gopalganj Town, Dist. Gopalganj

¶5

Hare Ram Singh S/O Balistar Singh (wrongly Stated As Harendra Singh in The Order Impugned Dated 20.07.2023) R/O Village- Kakar Kund, Ps. Gopalganj Town, Distt. Gopalganj

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey No.5, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 06-12-2023

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 181 of 2018, lodged on 19.04.2018, under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504/34 of the I.P.C.

¶15

As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against four named accused persons including the petitioners. In the FIR, it has been alleged that four accused persons have attacked by knife on the informant from backside due to which the informant sustained injury and he was referred to hospital.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64454 of 2023(3) dt.06-12-2023 2/3

¶18

petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He submits that informant and petitioners both are adjacent neighbour and on petty issue the dispute has arisen, which resulted in injury and case has been filed. Counsel submits that the antecedent of the petitioners are not clean. Against petitioner No.1 there was four cases and against petitioner No.2 there was three cases and in all cases both are on bail. Counsel submits that petitioners have surrendered and are in custody since 10.04.2023.

¶19

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that at the time of granting bail the criminal antecedents may be taken into consideration.

¶20

Upon the specific query of the Court that whether charge has been framed or not. Counsel submits that as per his knowledge charge sheet has been submitted but charge has not been framed.

¶21

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioners, above named, be granted bail only after framing of the charge on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, in connection

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64454 of 2023(3) dt.06-12-2023 3/3

¶23

with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No.181/2018, subject to the following conditions:

¶24

(i) One of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his bona fide;

¶25

(ii) The petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bonds by the Trial Court itself;

¶26

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the concerned police station every month for one year to mark attendance;

¶27

(iv) The petitioners shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; and

¶28

(v) The petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.

¶29

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶30

Mkr./-

¶31

U T

Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Singh @ Rahul 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

Madhusudan Sharma and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Punita Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ashutosh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pramod Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Fajil @ Fajilat Vs The State of Bihar

Jakir Kha @ Jafir Kha Vs The State of Bihar