Sanjeet Das @ Bhim Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36754 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2024 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna ====================================================== Sanjeet Das @ Bhim Das S/o- Bilat Das Resident of Village- Jethuli PS- Nadi Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arbind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No. 330 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons took the deceased with them, who was later found injured and unconscious near the house of Shambhu Rai and during course of treatment he succumbed to his injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36754 of 2025(2) dt.19-06-2025 2/2 possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no eye witness in the present case. The petitioner has been implicated only on the basis of suspicion. No specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2024 and has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation levelled against the petitioner. The witnesses have supported the prosecution case. It is further submitted that as per postmortem report of the deceased, cause of death has been mentioned as haemorrhage and shock. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T