Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2919 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2025 Thana- PARASBIGHA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Son of Jaigovind Paswan Resident of Village - Kashichak, P.S. - Shakurabad, District Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ansul Aryan, Advocate Ms. Easlute Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP For the Informant/s :

Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Parasbigha P.S. Case No. 269 of 2025 dated 13.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the son of the informant, namely, Md. Gulfan Ansari was working as a partner in City Nurshing Home in association with co-accused persons, namely, Md. Athar Hussain and Muskan Mam. It is further alleged that the informant's son used to live in the said nurshing home and allegedly on 13.10.2025, the informant got

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2919 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026 2/3 information on a phone that the dead body of his son, namely, Md. Gulfan Ansari was lying near the road of Sikariya More, thereafter the informant along with his family members went at that place and saw the dead body of his son smeared in blood and lying near the road with a slitting injury on his neck. It is further alleged that the informant's son had love affair with coaccused Muskan Mam due to which the informant had full belief that the accused persons named in the FIR and other unknown persons by hatching a conspiracy had committed murder of the informant's son.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR and materials against the petitioner are his call details with co-accused Muskan and the confessional statement of the petitioner while in police custody which has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Moreover, nothing incriminating was discovered/disclosed pursuant to the said confession. It has further been submitted that apart from suspicion there is no material against the petitioner. Moreover, there is no other chain of circumstances. It has been further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 19.10.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2919 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026 3/3 the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that there are transactions details between this petitioner and coaccused Uttam Kumar, who is also an accused in this case and there is serious suspicion against the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Jehanabad in connection with Parasbigha P.S. Case No. 269 of 2025.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T