Subin Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83081 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== Subin Kumar S/O Sargun Prasad Resident of Village- Nonay, P.S.- Akabarpur, District- Nawada, ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103 and 238 of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, informant suspects that one Laxman Pandit, who is driver of another truck of father of informant, due to money dispute, killed his father.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of investigation only on suspicion. Save and except suspicion, there is no material on record to show the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83081 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026 2/2 complicity of this petitioner in the alleged offence. Moreover, charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner is in custody since 30.03.2025.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that name of petitioner transpired during course of investigation and mobile phone of the deceased was recovered from the house of this petitioner. Petitioner has got two criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials that have surfaced during course of investigation and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant bail of to the petitioner is rejected.

7. However, considering the fact that petitioner is in custody since 30.03.2025, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T