Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14345 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Guddu Kumar, Son of Satynarayan Mahto, R/o Village - Ward no. 1, Rohua, P.S. -Sonbarsa @ Sonbrsa, Dist. - Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 190, 191 (2) (3), 115 (2), 118 (1), 303 (2) and 103 (1) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the husband of the deceased had gone with Amit Kumar and Abhishek Baitha towards Sitamarhi. As the informant suspected that some untoward incident might take place, she along with her brother-in-law also proceeded on a bike towards Rohua and upon they reached near village-Rohua, she found that nine persons are present there. It is alleged that Chandan Mahto was armed with 'dabia' and assaulted the husband of the informant

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14345 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/3 with the same, as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that on a bare perusal of the FIR, it is clear that though nine persons have been named in the FIR but the name of this petitioner does not find place there. During the course of investigation, the informant in her restatement stated that the petitioner was also present at the place of occurrence. It is further submitted that the only role attributed to the petitioner in re-statement of informant is that he was merely present there and no overt act has been alleged against him. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 22.08.2025 having no criminal antecedent. It has also been submitted that similarly situated co-accused Sumit Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 1640 of 2026.

5.

Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14345 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sitamarhi.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T