Nawal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50419 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2020 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Nawal Kumar S/o Jibash Choudhary @ Jivash Chaudhary R/o VillageJhapaha Dih, P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Meenapur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, the informant's son returned from Delhi on 05.01.2020. On 08.01.2020 at about 02:00 PM, he left his house stating that he was going to village Balakathi, Motihari to meet his maternal uncle Vijay Bhagat. At about 08:00 PM, the deceased informed his brother on mobile phone that he had reached Balakothi Chowk and would reach his uncle's house shortly. Thereafter, his mobile phone was switched off and he did not reach his uncle's house. On the next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50419 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026 2/3 day, after search and inquiry from local people, it was alleged that the accused persons committed his murder, due to previous enmity.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the co-accused, Alok Kumar @ Golu, who confessed his guilt and stated that he along with the petitioner, slit the throat of the deceased, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. As a matter of fact, the deceased had six criminal antecedents and except for the confessional statement, which has not led to any recovery, there is nothing against the petitioner in the entire case diary. She has further submitted that the petitioner was not residing in the house of the informant, rather, he was residing in the house of his Nani (maternal grandmother) and rarely visited the house of the informant. She has also submitted that the CDR of the mobile phones of the deceased and his brother was retrieved by the investigating agency and it was found that there was no conversation between the deceased and his brother. The petitioner has been in custody since 22.04.2025.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has four criminal antecedents.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50419 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026 3/3

6. The co-accused, who stands on a similar footing, has been granted bail. The petitioner has been in custody for more than nine months.

7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above-named, is directed to furnish bail bond and on doing so, the court below shall release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Muzaffarpur in connection with Meenapur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2020, subject to the following conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.

8. The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available on each and every date till conclusion of the trial.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T