Devesh Kumar @ Davesh Kumar @ Chhotu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75422 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- SINGHWARA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Devesh Kumar @ Davesh Kumar @ Chhotu S/o- Jatashankar Ray VillageBatroul P.S.- Mahindwara, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gulfeshan For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay For the Informant Mr. Padmanabh Kashyap Mr. Deepak Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant's husband was killed by some known miscreants.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first information report has been lodged against unknown and the name of the petitioner has transpired subsequently on the basis of CCTV footage in which the motorcycle of the petitioner was identified. It has further been argued that the petitioner has been made an accused merely on the basis of vague suspicion and as a matter of fact, the main conspirator of the case Saheb Anwar Quasmi has not mentioned the name of this petitioner and he has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75422 of 2025(3) dt.16-02-2026 2/2 also been granted bail by this Court. The petitioner is in custody since 03.06.2025, charge-sheet has been submitted and the cognizance has also been taken.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application for bail. It has been submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the informant that the petitioner along with two others on a motorcycle have been identified in the CCTV footage and the postmortem report also indicates that the deceased had died on account of firearm injuries caused by firing bullets in three separate fire. Further, materials against the petitioner is that the CDR discloses conversation between the petitioner and other accused persons and in his confessional statement also the petitioner has confessed his complicity.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that there are serious allegations of firing upon the deceased and there are materials available in the case diary to connect him to the said offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected in connection Singhwara P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T