Patna High CourtCR. MISC./82666/2025bail rejected

Suraj Kumar @ Mona v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-13Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82666 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2022 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Suraj Kumar @ Mona Son of Shivnath Vishwakarma @ Tuntun Mistry @ Shiv Nath Sharma Resident of Mohalla - Bhaisani Tola, Bari Bagicha, P.S. - Malsalami, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-02-2026 Heard Mr.Arvind Kumar Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Kumar for the informant beside Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 64 of 2022 for the offence punishable under sections 302, 120-B, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act, lodged on 17.04.2022 by the informant, Laljee Sharma.

3. The prosecution story alleges that the petitioner and Mukesh Kumar opened fire causing the death of his paternal aunt Chinta Devi. This followed the FIR.

4. Though, the FIR shows that Mukesh Kumar opened fire, paragraph-29 the case diary records the statement of the accused-petitioner before the Police wherein he recorded to have inserted four bullets in the head of his paternal aunt.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82666 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026 2/2

5. The Trial Court Report was called for, according to which, though charges have been framed, the prosecution has not produced any witness.

6. The report further shows that that non-bailable warrant issued on 02.09.2025 but it failed to record what happened from 02.09.2025 till the report was sent on 05.01.2026. Clearly, when the petitioner is in custody and the prosecution has failed to produce any witness, the Trial Court shall ensure that the nonbailable warrants issued against the witnesses are executed by the Police and the report be also sought for from ASP, Patna City, Patna as also the S.S.P., Patna in this regard. In any case, it is high time that the trial is taken to its logical conclusion without any unnecessary delay.

7. So far as the bail application is concerned, considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner of putting in four bullets in the head of his paternal aunt, this Court is not inclined to grant him relief. It is accordingly, rejected.

8. The Trial Court shall ensure that all possible steps are taken and the trial is taken to its logical conclusion, preferably within a period of six months.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T