Patna High CourtCR. MISC./17443/2025dismissed

Birbal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-11-21Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17443 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2023 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Birbal Kumar S/O Dev Raj Mahto R/O Village- Chaumukh, P.S- Bochahan, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Bochahan Case No. 506 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 24.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 49527 of 2024, the order dated 24.07.2024 reads as under:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 226 of 2024 arising out of Bochahan P.S. Case No. 506 of 2023 registered for an offence under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the deceased

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17443 of 2025(5) dt.21-11-2025 2/2 was brutally killed by the petitioner and others.

4. It has come during investigation that the deceased was having illicit relation with the wife of the petitioner and because of the same the petitioner and and one Deepak Kumar have cut the neck of the deceased.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner has participated in the killing of the deceased, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. 7. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest.

4. In the trial four witnesses have been examined, two are left to be examined who are the official witnesses.

5. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to review my earlier order. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. The S.S.P, Muzaffarpur is directed to ensure the examination of the witnesses.

6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the S.S.P, Muzaffarpur through FAX for its compliance. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Siddharth Soni/- U T