Parsuram Kumar @ Pasa v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4112 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-266 Year-2023 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna ====================================================== Parsuram Kumar @ Pasa Son of Brahmdev Yadav Resident of VillageGowasha Shekhpura (Ghera Par Beldari Par), P.S.- Pandarak, Distt.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bhim Sen Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case no. 266 of 2023 registered under sections 302, 120B, 341 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that on the orders of Subodh Yadav while Parsuram Kumair @ Pasa and Janak Kumar caught hold of his son, Ayush Kumar is stated to have fired on him with his pistol as a result of which he sustained firearm injury and died.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 12.7.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Cr. Misc. no. 26780 of 2024 giving liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4112 of 2025(2) dt.15-02-2025 2/2 whichever is later. It has been more than six months since passing of the said order and referring to the order of the learned trial Court it is submitted that charge has been framed against the petitioner in the learned trial Court and the case is proceeding for examination of prosecution evidence. The petitioner is in custody since 28.11.2023 and he undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, the liberty granted in the earlier order of rejection dated 12.7.2024, charge having been framed in the learned trial Court and the petitioner having remained in custody for more than one year since 28.11.2023, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case no. 266 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Barh(Patna). (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T