Jhunnu Kumar Singh @ Mohit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35637 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2024 Thana- Raghunathpur District- East Champaran ====================================================== Jhunnu Kumar Singh @ Mohit Singh S/o- Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Singh Village- Murarpur PS-Harsiddhi District- East Chmparan Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms.Kumari Rashmi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-08-2025 1.

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Shri Krishna Prasad Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. 2.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, at the outset, submits that co-accused Ramanand Thakur had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 29302 of 2025, and the same was rejected by an order dated 6-8-2025. It is next submitted that this Court, while rejecting the regular bail application of Ramanand Thakur, had

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35637 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/2 considered the case in detail. It is further submitted that the facts of the case has also been recorded in detail in Cr. Misc No. 29302 of 2025. It is next submitted that petitioner is alleged to be the assailant of the son of the informant and the son of the informant before dying disclosed the name of the petitioner that it was the petitioner who shot him.

4.

The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant that the petitioner is alleged to be the assailant of the son of the informant.

5.

Considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and also taking into consideration the order dated 6-8-2025 in Cr. Misc No. 29302 of 2025, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

6.

Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T