Sagar Kumar @ Bittu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41152 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sagar Kumar @ Bittu Kumar S/o Vishwanath Chaudhary R/o Nandgola, P.S.- Malsalami, Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Bihari Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with others has taken the son of the informant. It is further alleged that he was being killed by the petitioner and 3-4 others.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. It is very surprising that paragraph-31 of the case diary is the supervision report and in supervision report, the Supervising authority has recorded that informant and his niece, Sanjiv Kumar has given

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41152 of 2025(4) dt.20-08-2025 2/2 statement to the effect that one Nitesh has fired at the deceased but from perusal of the diary, it also transpires that their statement finds place in paragraph nos. 38 and 39 of the case diary. It means restatement of the informant and that of Sanjiv Kumar was recorded after the supervision report and the Supervising Authority knowing the statement of these two persons prior to their statement being recorded. This looks fishy. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 27.01.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2025(Sessions Trial No. 193 of 2025) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions JudgeVIII, Vaishali at Hajipur. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T