Satyendra Narayan @ Satyendra Narayan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19820 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Satyendra Narayan @ Satyendra Narayan Singh S/O Late Punyadev Singh R/O Village- Takina, P.S- Marhowrah, Distt.- Saran. 2.
Rateneshar Kumar Singh @ Ratneshwar Singh @ Ratnesh Singh S/O Late Punyadev Singh R/O Village- Maharuan, P.S- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Piyush Parasar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Anshuman Jaipuriyar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Marhaurah P.S. Case No. 279 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302, 506, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Prosecution story, in short, is that, accused persons including the petitioners assaulted the deceased Suresh Singh by means of lathi, iron rod, bricks, stone, due to which he sustained injuries and was taken to the hospital but, he died in course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19820 of 2025(4) dt.18-07-2025 2/3 treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against these petitioners. No specific overt act is alleged against these petitioners. He further submitted that there is land dispute between the parties. Learned counsel further contended that from perusal of the FIR, it is evident that FIR was lodged after the conduction of the postmortem of the deceased. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 18.12.2024. Petitioner no. 1 has three criminal antecedents whereas petitioner no. 2 has two criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the informant further submitted that trial has commenced and one witness has also been examined. Learned counsel for the informant relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph no. 14, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19820 of 2025(4) dt.18-07-2025 3/3 "14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court, be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused."
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the present stage of the trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners is, hereby, rejected.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T