Patna High CourtCR. MISC./67649/2025dismissed

Sailendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-31Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67649 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2023 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sailendra Kumar Son of Late Ram Bali Mahto Resident of village - Kamaldah, Tole - Korigama, Ward No.- 05, P.S.- Bathnaha, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner in connection with Bathanaha P.S. Case No. 7 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 307, 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 20.11.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 58762 of 2024 which reads as follows:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 07 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 307, 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67649 of 2025(2) dt.31-10-2025 2/2 petitioner is alleged to have shot at the victim with the fire arm. He is in jail since 18.05.2023.

4. The trial has started in the case.

One witness has been examined.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is dismissed.

6. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh bail application.

4. The petitioner is said to have shot at the victim namely Ajay Kumar. The victim has been examined as P.W.-2 and he has supported the prosecution case.

5. Considering the aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T