Priyanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8454 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-597 Year-2024 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Priyanshu Kumar S/O Late Harinarayan Ray R/O Vill.- Dighikala West P.SSadar Hajipur Dist- Dist-Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anshul Aaryan Mr. Shreyan Kumar Mr. Navneet Kumar For the State :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Vaisant Vikash ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 08-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. This is the first regular bail application of the petitioner seeking his regular bail in connection with Sadar Hajipur P.S. Case No. 597 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 103(1)/61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to the case of prosecution, on 21.08.2024 a written complaint has been filed by the informant wherein it is alleged that on 20.08.2024 at about 07:45 P.M., two unknown persons came to the place of occurrence and fired upon the father of the informant, due to that he sustained

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8454 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 2/3 injuries and subsequently he died. It is further alleged that at the time of incident, some other accused persons were also present. It is further mentioned in the written complaint that just before the death of Pankaj Rai, he named Angu @ Mayank, Badal Kumar and Navin Billa as assailant. On the basis of report made by the informant, the offence has been registered. During course of investigation on the basis of statement of the witness Chandeshwar Rai recorded by the Police, present applicant is taken in custody.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the first information report. There is no any legal evidence available on record against the applicant. He has been implicated only on the basis of the statement of the witness Chandeshwar Rai. The statement of Chandewhar Rai is recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. after one month of the alleged incident. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed and the prosecution does not cite the Chandeshwar Rai as a prosecution witness, therefore, on these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner may be granted benefit of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as the informant opposes the arguments raised by the counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8454 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 3/3 petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and particularly further considering the material collected by the prosecution, I am of the view that it is a case where the petitioner should be granted benefit of bail.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Hajipur (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 597 of 2024.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) shailendra/- U T