Patna High CourtCR. MISC./67844/2025dismissed

Shiv Ram Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67844 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2023 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Shiv Ram Sah S/o Late Kamleshwari Sah @ Ramji Sah R/o Village - Jajhat Sabaila, Ward no.- 10, P.S - Singheshwar, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Surya Narayan Yadav, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Rita Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 68 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 13.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19460 of 2024, which reads as under:

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, who is the father of the deceased, has got the information that his daughter was killed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67844 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026 2/2

4. During investigation, it has come that the petitioner had taken the service of coaccused in killing the deceased, who is his daughter.

5. The petitioner is in custody since 20.07.2023.

6. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that two witnesses have been examined in the trial.

5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T