[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Raj Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 27 August, 2025
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38246 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2018 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
1. Raj Kumar Singh S/O Subodh Prasad Singh Resident of Village -Sheetal
nagar Khutahari, Police Station Khalgaon, District- Bhagalpur
2. Arbind Kumar Nirala @ Arbind Kumar Singh S/O Late Rohin Mandal
Resident of Village -Sadanandpur Baisa, , Police Station- Khalgaon,
District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in Kahalgaon P. S. Case No.194 of 2018 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 144, 145, 147, 148, 149,
186, 283, 353, 504,109 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners, during the course of investigation, were given
notice under Section 41(1) of the Cr.P.C. It is next submitted
that during the course of investigation, the police never felt the
need of arresting the petitioners, but then, in a mechanical
manner submitted charge-sheet in the Year 2019 based on which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38246 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
2/3
cognizance came to be taken, as such, the petitioners apprehend
their arrest.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application and submits that from perusal of the order
impugned, it would manifest that petitioners earlier had moved
before the learned District Court in the Year 2018 seeking
anticipatory bail and the same was rejected, thereafter again
petitioners twice moved before the learned District Court
seeking anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed as
withdrawn.
5. On query of the Court from the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners that as to when they
approached the learned District Court seeking anticipatory bail
for the second and third time, on which the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that in the Year
2023 and 2024, on which learned A.P.P. submits that this amply
demonstrates that these petitioners were moving at their leisure
despite being aware that charge-sheet has been submitted and
cognizace taken. It is next submitted that the conduct of the
petitioners is such which does not entitle them for grant of
anticipatory bail as if the privilege of anticipatory bail is
granted, the petitioners may abscond and further delay the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38246 of 2025(3) dt.27-08-2025
3/3
framing of charge.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. The prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link