Kare Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57402 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2025 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Kare Singh S/O Sanjay Singh R/O Vill.- Ward no. 7, Ramdiri Tola, P.S.- Matihani, Dist.- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 52 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 140(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 corresponding to Section 365 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that two unknown persons took away the son of the informant, namely, Deepak Kumar @ Chippu. When he did not return till night, he was being searched. He was called on his mobile, but his mobile was switched off.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57402 of 2025(4) dt.12-12-2025 2/3 committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the occurrence is of 16.03.2025, which is regarding the missing of Deepak, but the FIR has been lodged on 18.03.2025 after a delay of two days. He also submits that during the course of investigation in para-6 of the case diary, one Pawan Kumar Singh has given his statement and has stated that the petitioner along with others has taken away the deceased. In para-45 of the diary, one Principal Kumar has given his confessional statement wherein he has stated that the petitioner is also his associate and that he is indulged in other crimes also and that he has confessed his guilt.

From perusal of the postmortem report, it is clear that the doctors have opined that the death was due to neurogenic and hemorrhagic shock as a result of ante-mortem injury caused by a hard and blunt object. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR; his name has surfaced in the story developed by the prosecution. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 30.05.2025.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57402 of 2025(4) dt.12-12-2025 3/3 for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Begusarai in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 52 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T