Shanny Kumar @ Sanni Kumar @ Sanni Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81374 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2024 Thana- CHIRAIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Shanny Kumar @ Sanni Kumar @ Sanni Kumar Singh S/O Satendra Singh Resident of Village-Haraj,P.S.-Shikarganj,District-East Champaran,Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-02-2026 Heard Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 20.01.2024 in connection with S.Tr.No.995 of 2025 arising out of Chiraiya (Shikarganj) P.S. Case No. 24 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 19.01.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302,120(B),34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 87040 of 2024. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved before the Court for renewing his prayer for bail but the bail petition of the petitioner bearing Cr.Misc. No. 51562 of 2025 has been dismissed as withdrawn by order order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81374 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026 2/3 25.07.2025 with liberty to move a fresh application before the learned court below. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present bail petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the deceased and he died during his treatment.

6. Vide order dated 22.12.2025, a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 19.01.2026 reveals that out of six chargesheet witnesses, four prosecution witnesses have been examined and the case is pending for examination of rest of two prosecution witnesses.

7. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner in the FIR which is supported by the medical evidence as well as report of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.Tr.No.995 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81374 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026 3/3 2025 arising out of Chiraiya (Shikarganj) P.S. Case No. 24 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Sikarahna at Dhaka, East Champaran, Motihari.

8. Prayer is refused.

9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T