Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12833 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2022 Thana- SHYAMPUR BHATHAN DistrictSheohar ====================================================== Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh S/o- Sunil Singh Resident of villageRamban PS- Shyampur Bhataha District- Sheohar ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhay Shanker Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nityanand, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Shayampur Bhataha P.S. Case No. 124 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, petitioner and co-accused Nitesh Kumar Singh @ Chhotu Singh are said to have made indiscriminate firing from the pistol as a result of which informant's brother sustained severe injury and fell on the ground and the injured was taken to hospital where he was declared dead by the doctor. It is further alleged that nine
2/4 accused persons including the petitioner and some unknown have concertedly participated in committing the alleged occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that bail prayer of the present petitioner has already been rejected on merit vide order dated 20.12.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 60839 of 2023. He further submits that delay of trial is not in any way attributable to the petitioner as petitioner is in custody since 19.05.2023 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that as per FIR, petitioner and co-accused Nitesh Kumar Singh @ Chhotu Singh are the main assailants of the deceased but during course of investigation, it is found that assailants of the deceased are Madhu Singh and Sunny Singh. In this way, petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
It is further submitted that petitioner's wife contested the Mukhiya election and from informant's side wife of the deceased was elected as Mukhiya and on account of election of Mukhiya, rivalry took place between petitioner and informant's side and on the said ground petitioner has been roped in the present case.
3/4 bail petition.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that bail prayer of the petitioner has already been rejected by this court on 20.12.2023 on merit. He referred the restatement of informant as well as statement recorded at para 15 of the case diary where there is direct allegation that petitioner and other made indiscriminate firing upon the deceased and the postmortem report corroborates the allegation made in the FIR. He further submits that there is no reason to grant bail to the petitioner as the case of present petitioner is totally different from the co-accused who have been granted bail.
6. In pursuance of direction of this court the trial court vide letter no. 53 of 2025 dated 21.08.2025 has sent its report which reveals that charge has been framed and necessary efforts have been taken to issue summons against the witnesses.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with postmortem report, earlier bail prayer of the petitioner has been rejected on merit as well as report of trial court, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
4/4
8. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T