← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74594/2025bail rejected

Amar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-11-14Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74594 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2025 Thana- BHAWANIPUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Amar Kumar S/O Sunil sah R/O Village- Teliyari Ward No. 8, P.SBhawanipur, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bidhu Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bhawanipur P.S. Case No. 93 of 2025 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023..

3. As per prosecution case, in brief, is that on 16.04.2025 cattle of Amar Kumar was tied on road, when accused asked him to remove, a fight ensued in which this petitioner and his wife assaulted his son to death.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. . Petitioner is in custody since 17.04.2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74594 of 2025(2) dt.14-11-2025 2/2

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposes the prayer for bail application of the petitioner and submits that as per F.I.R. petitioner appears to be the main assailant in this case, who brutally assaulted the son of the informant with bamboo stick and sharp edged iron scissors .

6. Considering the nature of accusation and material that has come during course of investigation, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, since petitioner is in custody since 17.04.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) mdrashid/- U T