Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar @ Dhuman Kumar @ Dhumal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67192 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-335 Year-2024 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Rohit Pandey @ Rohit Kumar @ Dhuman Kumar @ Dhumal Kumar son of Shri Jay Mangal singh Resident of Village- Rajauli, P.S.- Baniyapur, DistrictSaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 335 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

As per the prosecution case, while the informant along with his sons were irrigating his field, the accused persons started assaulting his son. On the order of co-accused, namely, Santosh Singh, petitioner allegedly fired upon the son of the informant due to which he died.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 04-09-2024. Petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67192 of 2025(2) dt.15-09-2025 2/2 5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegation of firing is allegedly against petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner neither had motive nor the intention to harm the victim, as there was a land dispute between the informant and the co-accused. Charge sheet has already been submitted in this case.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. There is direct allegation of firing against the petitioner and he has confessed his guilt in his confessional statement. 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being direct allegation of firing against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T