Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4167/2026rejected

Narendra Pandey @ Narad Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4167 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== NARENDRA PANDEY @ NARAD PANDEY Son of Late Bachu Pandey Resident of Village - Chhotaka Mor (Khurd), Police Station - Sasaram Muffasil in the district of Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umanath Mishra, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 18.08.2025, in connection with Sasaram Muffasil P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 351(2), 352, 3(5), 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has fired upon the victim due to which he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4167 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026 2/2 petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is specific allegation of firing attributed against the petitioner and apart from that the petitioner has also confessed his guilt which was recorded in paragraph-59 of the case diary as well as a number of witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and medical evidence (postmortem report) also supports the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the victim and the medical report also supports the same, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sasaram Muffasil P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T