Satish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6610 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Satish Kumar S/O Uma Sah @ Umesh Sah R/O Village- Dholi, Ward No. 6, P.S- Bangaon, District- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 19-03-2025 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 71 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act lodged on 20.02.2024 by the informant, Saroj Paswan.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant (chowkidar) informed that while moving in the orchard of Late Shyam Sundar Singh, found a person dead. Accordingly, Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 71 of 2024 was lodged. It came to the notice of the family of the deceased and they identified the body. Subsequently, the investigation started and arrived at the door of Saurav Kumar who gave the confession that Prince Kumar was having issue with the deceased inasmuch as he had opened fire causing injury to the Prince Kumar. He accordingly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6610 of 2025(2) dt.19-03-2025 2/2 made a plan along with his friends, Saurav, Satish Kumar (petitioner herein) and Golden, the deceased was taken to the place, they consumed Ganja and thereafter, while Saurav hit him on his head, Satish opened fire causing injury. Prince Kumar who had planned the entire conspiracy was regularly in touch and thereafter, directed Saurav to crush the SIM that has been used and left the place.

4. Learned Senior counsel submitted that number of persons have been assigned the role in the present case, petitioner being one of them.

5. Learned APP took this Court to the FIR again to show that the petitioner had played an important role which caused the death.

6. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and the present bail application stands rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T