Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37057/2025dismissed

Md. Jannat v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-15Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37057 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2024 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Md. Jannat S/O Md. Sakur R/O Village- Gadaha (Ghatha) Govindpur, Ward No. 9, P.S- Pratapganj, Distt.- Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-09-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Birpur P.S. Case No. 324 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 140(3), 140(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S..

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons have conspired together and have kidnapped her husband and killed him. During investigation, the motorcycle has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the recovery of the motorcycle will not fasten any criminal liability upon the petitioner until and unless there is some material to connect the petitioner with crime. He has also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37057 of 2025(3) dt.15-09-2025 2/2 submitted that one co-accused has been granted privilege of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc No. 32891 of 2025. The petitioner is in custody since 27.09.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner is involved in the crime and the motorcycle of the deceased has been recovered from him, hence, he does not deserve bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that motorcycle has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.

8. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) anand/- U T