Manoj Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56974 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2024 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Manoj Sah S/o Ram Vilash Sah R/o Village - Pakari, P.S - Riga, District Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms.Jyoti Kumari, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 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 Riga P.S. Case No. 169 of 2024 dated 04.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 03.06.2024, the informant came to know from villagers that the dead body of his uncle was found. Thereafter, police was informed and the dead body was sent for post-mortem and cremation was performed. It is further alleged that there is suspicion raised against some persons namely, Raghuveer Sahni, Janaki Devi and Awadesh Pandit because they were relative of the informant's uncle and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56974 of 2025(2) dt.20-08-2025 2/3 due to some money transaction with them, the accused persons and some unknown persons have committed murder of his uncle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has been made accused in this case merely on suspicion. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner was disclosed by one Shivam Dev and he has also stated that he had seen the petitioner with the deceased at 7.30 P.M., on 02.06.2024. Learned counsel has further submitted that the entire FIR is based on circumstantial suspicion as deceased was last seen with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 02.06.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that during the course of investigation, the statements of the witnesses are recorded in para nos. 37 and 45 of the case diary in which they have stated that the petitioner was last seen alive with the deceased and it is a case of last seen theory. Learned counsel has further submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56974 of 2025(2) dt.20-08-2025 3/3 that the petitioner was involved with the co-accused persons in the commission of murder of the informant's uncle.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail.

7. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T