Alok Kumar Dhari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26627 of 2025 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40739 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-510 Year-2022 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Alok Kumar Dhari son of Umesh Yadav @ Umesh Singh Resident Of Vill -Jamuawan, P.S- Daudnagar, District- Aurangabad at present working in Indian Army as Naik (Military Police) and posted in 17 Corps Provost Unit at Panagarh (West Bangal) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Basant Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr.Vishesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate For Informant :

Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Heard Mr. Basant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the informant beside the State.

2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 510 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under section 25(1-b) 9/27/35/36 of the Arms Act lodged on 03.09.2022 by the informant, Sabita Devi.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant, widow of Raju Kumar @ Vinay Singh has alleged that while they were seeding they paddy at Jamuawan, the petitioner (herein)

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26627 of 2025(4) dt.18-07-2025 2/3 alongwith other co-accused arrived and on the instigation of Umesh Yadav and Chinta Devi, allegation is that this petitioner opened fire which pierced the ear of the informant's husband and he died instantly. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has repeated what was earlier submitted while hearing the first bail application in Cr. Misc. No. 59050 of 2023 that on the fateful day, he had already left the place and was to report at Panagarh (West Bengal) and the certificate of the Army supports his case alongwith bus ticket.

5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that not only the petitioner is the main assailant, the eye-witnesses have supported the prosecution story and further the CDR details have been procured by the Police according to which, he was present at the place of occurrence.

6. Learned APP also supports the prosecution theory and submits that as per the Trial Court Report, the prosecution 14 witnesses have already been examined and now defence has to be examined.

7. Considering the submissions of the parties and the nature of allegation that has come against the petitioner, it would be appropriate that the trial is taken to its logical

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26627 of 2025(4) dt.18-07-2025 3/3 conclusion at an earliest and if possible within a period of nine months.

8. The bail application stands rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T