Navlesh Thakur @ Naulesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16039 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2024 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Navlesh Thakur @ Naulesh Thakur Son of Late Lalan Thakur Resident of Village - Sangrampur Mathiya, P.S. - Sangrampur, District- East Champaran at Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J.N. Thakur For the Informant :

Mr. Madhurendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 174 of 2024, in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 329(3), 352, 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons assaulted the informant and her devar (deceased) with lathi due to which informant got injured and her devar (deceased) died during the treatment.

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16039 of 2025(3) dt.21-11-2025 2/2 the present case. The petitioner is in incarceration since 26.09.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that there is specific allegation on the petitioner that he inflicted fatal axe blow on the head of the deceased. It has further been submitted that as per postmortem report, injury on skull (parietal region) of the deceased, was found.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) priyanka/- U T