← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56113/2025dismissed

Kajal Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-19Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56113 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2024 Thana- MITHANPURA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Kajal Kumari W/o Manoj Lal D/o - Nanki Sahni @ Kamal Sahni R/o Mohalla- Rambagh Shastri Nagar Mira Kunj, P.S - Mithapura, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar S.K.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 18 of 2025 arising out of Mithanpura P.S. Case No. 260 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 103(1), 238, 61(2) of the BNS as earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 23.04.2025 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Mithanpura P.S. Case No.260 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under sections 103(1), 238 & 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. It is alleged that the petitioner has killed her three years old child as the petitioner was having an affair with someone. She is in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56113 of 2025(2) dt.19-09-2025 2/2 custody since 27.08.2024.

4. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant her privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.

3. The trial of the case has started and out of five prosecution witnesses, two have already been examined.

4. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact the the trial of the petitioner has started, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U