Pratik Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63974 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Pratik Kumar S/o Raj Nandan Kumar @ Prem Singh @ Rajnandan Singh R/o Village - Uffraul, P.S - Desari, District - Vaishali (Bihar) 2.

Braj Nandan Kumar S/o Late Asheshwar Singh R/o Village - Uffraul, P.S - Desari, District - Vaishali (Bihar) ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vasant Vikas, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The accused/petitioners seek bail in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 156 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 103(1), 61, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the 'B.N.S.').

3. The accused/petitioners are named in the First Information Report and are in custody since 10.05.2025.

4. As per FIR, allegation against petitioners is to commit murder of the husband of co-accused namely, Neelam Sinha due to certain family quarrel.

5. The photocopy of charge-sheet and copy of case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63974 of 2025(2) dt.30-10-2025 2/3 diary including post-mortem report was submitted by learned A.P.P. across the board, which was taken on record.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that informant is the chowkidar of this case. It is pointed out that the occurrence was reported to chowkidar by Mukhiya of the village and no one is the eye witness. It is pointed out that entire implication is based upon hearsay input.

7. While concluding argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, charge-sheet has been submitted and as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

8. Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners, being nephew and brother-in-law of the wife of deceased was called from their village, who assaulted brutally to deceased due to which he died. It is pointed out that upon post-mortem, several injuries including fracture of 4th, 5th & 6th ribs on left side of chest of the deceased were found. The dead body was also recovered from the house itself from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63974 of 2025(2) dt.30-10-2025 3/3 where petitioners were apprehended.

9. Considering the aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as petitioners, being brother-in-law and nephew of main accused, who is the wife of deceased was arrested from the home of deceased immediately after occurrence, the prayer of bail of the petitioners stands rejected.

10. However, as petitioners remain in custody since 10.05.2025, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Rajeev/- U T