Ram Niranjan Kumar @ Mangal Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46379 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-606 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Ram Niranjan Kumar @ Mangal Singh Son of Lalan Singh @ Lalo Singh village- and Po-Wallipur, Ps- Piparia, Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Mayank Bilochan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 29-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 606 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner has shot the son of informant on his chest due to which he fell down and in 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.46379 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025 2/2 possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. There is land dispute between the parties and due to the said dispute the petitioner has been falsely implicated by the informant. The petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2025 and has got two criminal antecedents.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that direct allegation of firing upon the deceased is against the petitioner. It is further submitted that post-mortem report of the deceased corroborates with the FIR. 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