Uditya Kumar @ Aditya Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68740 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2024 Thana- KHIRI MORE District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Uditya Kumar @ Aditya Kumar, S/O Mahendra Yadav, R/O VillageMahuari, P.S- Paypura (Khirimore), District- Patna. 2.

Dillu Kumar, S/O Lalkeshwar Yadav, R/O Village- Maheshpur, P.SKhirimore, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Soni Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 26-09-2025 Heard Ms. Soni Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners have renewed their prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Khirimore P.S. Case No. 108 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 82870 of 2024 with an observation that the petitioners will be at liberty to renew their prayer for bail after six months, if so advised.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also filed a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68740 of 2025(3) dt.26-09-2025 2/3 supplementary affidavit to the effect that petitioner no.2 is having no criminal antecedent and for that he has also annexed the charge sheet of Khirimore P.S. Case no. 166 of 2023.

4. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 24.05.2024, the husband of the informant was shot dead by unknown miscreants while he was returning from Reganiya Dih Balu Ghat.

5. The F.I.R. was lodged against unknown miscreants. During course of investigation, the petitioners have given their confessional statement in which they have stated the manner how they have committed the offence. In paragraph-65 of the case diary, the tower location of the mobile of the petitioners was collected and it is found that the tower location of the petitioners was found at the place where the deceased was found.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that tower location is generally with respect to a larger place and it cannot pin point as to at which place, the mobile was placed at that time. Except the tower location, no incriminating material was found against these petitioners during investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that as per para-4 of the bail petition, the petitioner no. 1 is in judicial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68740 of 2025(3) dt.26-09-2025 3/3 custody since 16.07.2024 whereas the petitioner no. 2 is in judicial custody since 27.07.2024.

7. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by learned APP for the State.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur at Patna, in connection with Khirimore P.S. Case No. 108 of 2024.

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