Dismissed¶21

Shubham Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Feb 2025CR. MISC./80682/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No. 80682 of 2024; decided 11-02-2025; Rajiv Roy, J.; bail application rejected; Sections 309(4) and 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; Imadpur P.S. Case No. 86 of 2024; District Bhojpur; informant Shyamuddin Ansari; armed loot of Rs. 2,40,000/- from Bank of India C.S.P. counter; petitioner Shubham Kumar alleged supplier of weapon; recovery of money from petitioner; T.I. parade identification of co-accused; petitioner's name surfaced post-confession; in custody since 12.08.2024; advocates Raju Kumar Singh (petitioner) and Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP (State).

What did the court decide?

The Court declined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. ¶20

Shubham Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80682 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2024 Thana- IMADPUR District- Bhojpur

¶3

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

¶4

Shubham Kumar Son of Arvind Kumar Sah @ Arvind sah Resident of village -Pawana, PS- Pawana, District- Bhojpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 11-02-2025 Heard the parties.

¶14

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with the Imadpur P.S. Case No. 86 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita lodged on 05.08.2024 by the informant, Shyamuddin Ansari.

¶15

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he runs C.S.P. of the Bank of India and on the fateful day, the accused came to the counter and after threatening with the gun, took away Rs. 2,40,000/- on motorcycle. This led to the case.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his role is limited to the allegation that the weapon was provided by him for which payments were made and he has already

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80682 of 2024(3) dt.11-02-2025 2/2

¶18

remained in custody since 12.08.2024.

¶19

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh on the other hand has taken this Court to the learned Sessions Judge order to show that not only he supplied the weapon to the accused persons but there is also recovery of money from him. He further submits that the informant has identified the co-accused in T.I. parade and post confession, the name of the petitioner has come up.

¶20

Considering the allegation in the FIR coupled with the fact that he has played an important role of supplying the weapon to the accused persons which became the reason for the looting, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail

¶21

The present bail application stands rejected.

¶22

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶23

Adnan/-

¶24

U T

Shubham Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aman Sharma @ Aman Akash Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Randheer Kumar, Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar Upadhayay Vs The State of Bihar

Sugo Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Kalyan Kishore Singh @ Chun Chun Singh @ Kalyan Kishore Purnendu @ Kalyan Kishor Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar