Patna High CourtCR. MISC./83511/2025bail rejected

Subodh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-12Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83511 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2025 Thana- PUNAURA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Subodh Paswan Son of Late Vishwanath Paswan Resident of Village - Raghopur Bakhari, P.S.- Punaura, District - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

3. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that this petitioner pressed the neck of brother of informant resulting in his death.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner, having no criminal antecedents, is in custody since 28.07.2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83511 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026 2/2

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he pressed the neck of the deceased leading to his death.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant bail of to the petitioner is rejected.

7. However, considering the fact that petitioner is in custody since 28.07.2025, 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