Tunnu Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 20-06-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 140(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶15

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the son of the informant, namely Subham Kumar alias Lucky, aged about 18 years, had gone to fetch medicines at Buxar on 21.11.2024 at 06:00 AM. At 10:00 AM, a call was received on the mobile number of the informant’s son. The informant came to know that his son had been kidnapped, and a ransom of Rupees Six lakhs was demanded, failing which, a threat of dire consequences was given.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30067 of 2025(3) dt.20-06-2025 2/3

¶18

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. He also submits that in this case, the petitioner’s name has been surfaced in para-14 of the case diary and from perusal of which, it is clear that the police has apprehended altogether five accused persons including this petitioner with the victim. The victim has also given his Statement under Section 183 of the BNSS, wherein he has detailed the occurrence that how he was locked in the toilet of train by the miscreants and they have made a call from his mobile for the ransom. The victim has not named any person as to who has kidnapped him. He also submits that though there is allegation of ransom but no amount has been given and the victim was recovered within eleven hour of the incident. It is very surprising that para-14 of the case diary does not disclose as to from which place the police has apprehended the victim and petitioner and others. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 22.11.2024.

¶19

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of one case.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30067 of 2025(3) dt.20-06-2025 3/3

¶22

inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 43 of 2025 arising out of Itarshi P.S. Case No. 263 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge 1^st -cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST (POA), Act, Buxar.

¶23

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶24

Sudhanshu/-

¶25

U T

Tunnu Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tunnu Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Tinku @ Aslam Kuraishi @ Tinku @ Tinku Miyan @ Md. Aslam Kuraishi Vs The State of Bihar

Binay Kumar Paswan @ Vinay Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Nandu Roy Vs The State of Bihar

Rishi Paswan @ Rishi Kapur Vs The State of Bihar