Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81173 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar S/o Ram Narayan Ray @ Raj Kumar Ray R/o VillageKharidabad, PS- Muffasil, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad, Sr. Advocate Ms. Sneha Shruti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 07.05.2025, in connection with Samastipur Nagar P.S. Case No. 70 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 07.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has fired upon the victim due to which he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81173 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of material available on record and case diary, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is direct and specific allegation of firing attributed against the petitioner and apart from aforesaid, the witnesses have also supported the case of the prosecution which was recorded in paragraph-13 of the case diary as well as apart from aforesaid the postmortem report also support the case of the prosecution.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts that there is direct and specific allegation of firing supported by the medical evidence as well as a number of witness have also supported the case of the prosecution, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Samastipur Nagar P.S. Case No. 70 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81173 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026 3/3