Sugan Mandal @ Sugen Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25560 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2025 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.

Sugan Mandal @ Sugen Mandal S/o Raghu Mandal Resident of villageChama, PS- Amdabad, District- Katihar 2.

Chhotu Mandal @ Chhottu Kumar Mandal S/o Raghu Mandal Resident of village- Chama, PS- Amdabad, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sharda Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 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 Amdabad P.S. Case No. 03 of 2025 dated 05.01.2025 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 130(1), 61(2) read with section 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners and the co-accused persons are alleged to have called the informant's son and took him away but the informant's son did not return whole night. Thereafter, the informant came to know that the petitioners and the co-accused persons assaulted his son due to that he died and they threw his dead body in the field.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25560 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The informant is not the eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. There is no direct allegation of assaulting the informant's son. The name of the petitioner has sprung up on mere suspicion. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 06.01.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the the petitioners took the informant's son away thereafter his dead body was found. It is a case of last seen theory. It is further stated that when the informant's son asked his wages from the petitioner no. 1, due to that he killed him under conspiracy. It is further stated that earlier the accused persons had also threatened his son.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

7. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T