Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56012/2025dismissed

Jugesh Patel @ Jugesh Chaudhary @Mahangu v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56012 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2023 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Jugesh Patel @ Jugesh Chaudhary @Mahangu S/o Ramadhar Chaudhary Resident of Village- Kusmha, P.S. Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh For the State :

Mr. Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 129 of 2024 arising out of Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 384 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and later on Sections 394/411 of the IPC and 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68450 of 2024, which reads as under: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 384/2023 registered

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56012 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Subsequently, 394/411 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act has been added.

3. The petitioner is in jail since 08.09.2023.

4. It has come during investigation that the petitioner and one Mahangu tried to loot the deceased and in that occurrence, the deceased was killed. Materials have come to connect the petitioner with the crime including the CDR evidence. The petitioner has similar antecedent also.

5. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed."

4. Four witnesses has already been examined and the trial is started.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) priyanka/- U T