Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49656 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-895 Year-2024 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Sunny Kumar S/o Bishu Paswan @ Vishu Paswan R/o Laddu Akhara Gas Godown, P.S.- Alamganj, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vidyapati Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pawan Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Utsav, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Vats, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 895 of 2024 dated 08.10.2024 arising out of G.R. No. 711/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Later on Section 25(1-B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act was added.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the co-accused, Sanjeet Yadav and others have murdered the husband of the informant due to land dispute, the informant also stated that her husband had said that Sanjeet Kumar was making pressure on him for registering the new constructed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49656 of 2025(2) dt.18-08-2025 2/3 house at Bajrang puri. She also stated that Sanjeet Kumar along with others have threatened her husband along with firing. She further stated that her husband went to morning walk and during that time Sanjeet Kumar killed her husband. She also claimed that Sanjeet Yadav killed her husband by firing due to land dispute.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the co-accused person. The charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 18.10.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that during investigation the petitioner was seen in the C.C.T.V. footage on the place of occurrence. It is further submitted that the petitioner is involved in the commission of the murder of the deceased. One of the coaccused, Dharmendra was arrested on the basis of C.C.T.V.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49656 of 2025(2) dt.18-08-2025 3/3 footage and his confessional statement has been recorded in Para-25 of the case diary in which he disclosed that the petitioner fired on the victim, the arms was supplied to him by the co-accused Shiv Kumar and Rohit Pandey, further the coaccused, Sanjeet Kumar @ Sanjeet Yadav has given Rs. 5000/- to the petitioner to kill Rajeev Ratan Gupta. Earlier the regular bail application of the other co-accused persons were rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10643 of 2023.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of offence against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 895 of 2024 arising out of G.R. No. 711/2025, pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M.-VI, Patna city, Patna.
7. The application stands rejected and the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T