Shailesh Sah @ Shailesh Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21435 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2021 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Shailesh Sah @ Shailesh Kumar Gupta Son of Yogendra Sah Resident of Village - Gamhari, P.S.- Baikunthpur, District - Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dharmveer For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in Baikunthpur P. S. Case No.175 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 02.12.2024 and is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.66626 of 2021 and same came to be rejected by an order dated 19.07.2022. It is next submitted that thereafter petitioner moved before this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.6177 of 2025 and the same came to be rejected by the then learned Coordinate Bench by an order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21435 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 2/2 29.07.2025. It is further submitted that from perusal of Annexure-3 series, it would manifest that Pawan Singh, Santosh Sah along with Deepak Sah, Tinku Sah and Rahul Sah had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail and regular bail and the same came to be allowed, as such, the learned counsel seeks parity.

4. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that while rejecting the regular bail application of the petitioner, the learned Coordinate Bench by order dated 29.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.6177 of 2025 had considered the case in detail and on merits. It is next submitted that petitioner is the assailant of the deceased and those who have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail and regular bail are not similarly situated like the petitioner.

5. The Court has perused the order dated 29.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.6177 of 2025 and thus, is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

6. The prayer of the petitioner for regular bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T