Sagar Rai @ Sagar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89060 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-900 Year-2023 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Sagar Rai @ Sagar Kumar Son of Kashi Rai @ Okashi Ray Resident of Village - Ganga Tola Lodipur, Beapur, P.S.- Maner, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr.Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 900 of 2023 registered for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The accused/petitioner is named in the First Information Report and is in custody since 03.06.2024.

4. As per FIR, petitioner along with other co-accused persons committed murder of the son of the informant by causing fire-arm injury.

5. Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel, while

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89060 of 2024(6) dt.20-08-2025 2/3 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that informant is not an eye witness of the alleged occurrence and entire allegation is raised on the basis of hearsay input what the informant received from undisclosed source.

6. It is submitted that one of the reason for implication of the petitioner with the present occurrence is suspicion arising out of his criminal antecedents as he found involved in five criminal cases, where in three cases, he is on bail.

7. While concluding argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, charge-sheet has been submitted and as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

8. Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, submitted that during investigation witnesses while recording their statement under section 161 of the Cr.P.C./180 of the B.N.S.S. categorically claimed themselves as an eye witness of the occurrence and stated that this petitioner shot dead the son of the informant. It is also submitted that confessional statement of petitioner was recorded and thereafter the weapons, which were used in the crime, was also recovered from the possession of this petitioner,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89060 of 2024(6) dt.20-08-2025 3/3 which, upon forensic examination, confirmed the alleged firing.

9. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of the fact as several witnesses, during course of investigation, claimed themselves as an eye witness of the occurrence by specifically alleging that the petitioner shot dead the son of the informant, coupled with the fact that upon his confession weapon of crime appears recovered from possession of the petitioner.

10. Accordingly, prayer of bail of the petitioner stands rejected herewith for the present.

11. As the petitioner remains in custody since 03.06.2024, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order by taking this matter on day-to-day basis.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Rajeev/- U T