Jacky Kumar @ Jaiky Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73315 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2024 Thana- NEORA District- Patna ====================================================== Jacky Kumar @ Jaiky Kumar Son of Pankaj Prasad Resident of MohallaTillu tola, Police Station- Naubatpur, District- Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma, APP Mr. Aditya Pandey, Advocate Mr. Ishita Raj, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 120(b) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the son of the informant namely, Amlesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar was called by someone for some work. When the son of the informant reached there, Upendra Rai caught hold him and Tunna Kumar shot dead him. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. During the course of investigation, CDR of the petitioner was collected and from the CDR, it was found that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73315 of 2024(4) dt.20-02-2025 2/2 petitioner had made call to the deceased and on interrogation, the petitioner has confessed his guilt stating that he had snatched the mobile of the deceased and the same kept under the soil. From perusal of paragraph-90 of the case diary, it appears that on the confession of the petitioner, the mobile was recovered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.06.2024 having no criminal antecedent.

6. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions put forward by the parties, I am not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail which is accordingly rejected.

8. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T