Sonu Kumar Yadav @ Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65753 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Sonu Kumar Yadav @ Sonu Kumar S/o Deo Kumar Yadav R/o vill - Shidhap Kala, P.S.- Ladaniya, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Thakur, Adv.

Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.

Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 28-11-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 03.05.2025.

4. As per FIR, 5 named co-accused persons committed murder of the husband of the informant by causing fire arm injury.

5. Mrs. Vaishanvi Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that from the perusal of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65753 of 2025(3) dt.28-11-2025 2/3 FIR it can be gathered safely that informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence as she established at the place of occurrence after knowing about the occurrence after receiving alarm. In this context, it is submitted that source of knowledge regarding occurrence also not appears disclosed through FIR suggesting a question mark regarding claim of informant being an eye witness of the present occurrence. It is further submitted that even as per allegation as set out through FIR, there is general and omnibus allegation qua firing where upon post-mortem single fire arm injury was noticed upon deceased husband of the informant. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is found involved in three more criminal cases where he is on bail and moreover, investigation of this case is completed, for which charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

6. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

7. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as the narration of FIR, prima-facie creates a doubt regarding claims of informant being an eye witness of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65753 of 2025(3) dt.28-11-2025 3/3 the occurrence, coupled with fact that investigation of this case already completed where petitioner remains in custody since 03.05.2025, accordingly petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Principal sessions Judge, Madhubani /concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 480(3) of BNSS.

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