Sannaullah Ahmad @ Dhannu @ Dhanu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21696 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2024 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Sannaullah Ahmad @ Dhannu @ Dhanu S/O Salluddin Ahmad R/O Vill.- Qutub Chhapara, P.S.- Hussainganj, Dist.- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Chandra Mohan Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Hussainganj P.S. Case No. 317 of 2024 dated 10.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 103, 61(2) of the BNS, and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have shot the informant's husband dead. It is further alleged that earlier the co-accused persons have threatened the informant's husband to kill.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21696 of 2025(3) dt.30-07-2025 2/3 this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. There is nothing against the petitioner except suspicion. The specific allegation of firing is against the co-accused Raja. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 18.10.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that as per the statement of the co-accused Santosh Kumar, mentioned in para 12 of the case diary, that the co-accused Santosh Kumar gave contract to the petitioner to kill the informant's husband and for that he also paid Rs. 1.5 lakhs to the petitioner as advance. It is further stated that on 09.09.2024, the petitioner informed the co-accused Santosh Kumar, that the informant's husband was killed, which shows the clear involvement of the petitioner in the crime alleged.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the application stands rejected.
7. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21696 of 2025(3) dt.30-07-2025 3/3 trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T