Siddharth Kumar Singh vs State Of Bihar

The matter has been heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heard Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhdyay, learned In-charge Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at the time of filing the application, it was without affidavit, but, now, the affidavit has been done

and, thus, undertakes that today itself the same shall be e filed before the Court.

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Riga PS Case No.28 of 2020 dated 28.01.2020, instituted under Section 394 of the Indian Penal

Code.

The allegation against the petitioner, though not named in the FIR, is that he along with two other persons had entered into the office of the

informant and after creating havoc had looted rupees twenty five thousand and the accused had also fired two rounds in the air to scare the public

who were present there.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that besides not being named in the FIR, nothing has been recovered from him and only because after

three days of the incident, he was arrested in Riga PS Case No.32 of 2020 instituted under the Arms Act, on 01.02.2020, in which there was a so-

called confessional statement of the petitioner disclosing his involvement in the present case, based upon which, he has been remanded in the present

case also on 05.03.2020. Learned counsel submitted that besides the other case, he has no other criminal antecedent and is also not connected with

the crime and due to highhandedness of the police, he has been falsely implicated.

Learned APP submitted that in close proximity the petitioner was arrested with firearms and he had disclosed his complicity in the present case also

and there is no reason to disbelieve the same as that is the normal procedure of investigation where the identity of the culprits is not known.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail

upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in Riga PS Case No.28 of 2020, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii)

that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner, and (iii) that the petitioner shall also give an

undertaking to the Court that he shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity, act in violation of any law/statutory provisions, tamper with the

evidence or influence the witnesses. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead to cancellation of his bail

bonds. The petitioner shall cooperate in the case and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to cooperate or being absent on two

consecutive dates, without sufficient cause, shall also lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

This order shall be subject to the petitioner e filing the affidavit before the Court today.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.