Brajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6923 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2024 Thana- BANGAWON District- Saharsa ====================================================== Brajesh Kumar, S/o- Suchan Yadav, Resident of Garahiapatti, Ward No 10, P.S.- Bangaon, Dist- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 04-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Anish Chandra, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 54 and 351(3) of the BNS and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that certain unknown miscreants killed the father of the informant while he was in a salon. The name of this petitioner has surfaced in the confessional statement of one Ashish. In the confessional statement of Ashish it has come that he has gave the weapon of assault to the petitioner for concealing the same in the house of Hariom. From perusal of para-66 of the case diary it transpires

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6923 of 2025(3) dt.04-04-2025 2/2 that this petitioner has disclosed to the police that the weapon of assault has been concealed in the house of Hariom and the same was recovered from the house of Hariom.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this case there is no indulgence of the petitioner. He is a student aged about 20 years but from perusal of the materials in the case diary it is clear that on the disclosure of Ashish and this petitioner, the weapon of assault was recovered from the house of Hariom.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the Informant have opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T