Vimlesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 01-12-2025 Heard the parties.

¶13

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in

¶14

connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 87 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 149, 448, 354, 307, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The allegation against the petitioners is of causing assault to the informant and his family members along with other accused persons, besides the allegation of snatching of valuables.

¶16

Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that from the narratives made in the F.I.R. itself, it is evident that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners, except the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74510 of 2025(2) dt.01-12-2025 2/3

¶18

petitioners are said to be the persons, who are involved in the crime. Co-accused persons, having identical allegation, namely, Bindeshwari Singh and Mantu Singh, have been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 7990 of 2024. Referring thereto, it is further submitted that the case of the petitioners’ stands on parity with those, who have been accorded the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petitioners bear fair antecedent. So far the delay in approaching the Court is concerned, it is submitted that the petitioners have never been acquainted with regard to lodging of the F.I.R. nor the police has ever chased them, till filing of the bail application before the learned Sessions Judge.

¶19

On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioners have been evading their arrest for the last nine years and for this reason alone, they do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶20

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that other co-accused persons, facing identical allegation, have been accorded the privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court and the petitioners also

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74510 of 2025(2) dt.01-12-2025 3/3

¶22

deserve similar treatment, as the uniformity demands, besides the fair antecedent, let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 87 of 2016, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close relative of the petitioners.

¶23

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶24

uday/-

¶25

U T

Vimlesh Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimlesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhirendra Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar through Mr. S. Siddharta, the Principal Secretary, Education Department

Baij Nath Prasad Vs Janki Mushar

Md. Yahya Vs The State of Bihar

Jagannath Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Sahay Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Mahto @ Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar