Amresh Prasad @ Bajrangi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83646 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2025 Thana- SAKURABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Amresh Prasad @ Bajrangi, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Saryu Prasad Resident of Village- Gyanibigha, P.S.- Sakurabad, District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandni Kumari, Advocate Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate Ms. Priya Ranja, Advocate Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP For the Informant ;

Mr. Aniket Rai, Advocate Mr. Prashant Sinha, Advocate Mr. Shrish Anurag, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of BNS.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner is alleged to have committed the murder of father-in-law of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that there is not a single eye witness of the incident except the family members of the informant and name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion. He next submits that from perusal of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83646 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 2/3 post-mortem report, it appears that there is no external injury on the body of the deceased and the cause of death is due to cardio respiratory arrest. He next submits that in para-56 of the case diary, it is evident that in the FIR pair of slipper of the petitioner was mentioned but upon investigation no slippers were produced by the informant's side before the Investigating Officer. He lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 23.09.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. On perusal of the FIR, case diary, impugned order dated 13.11.2025 and post-mortem report of the deceased, it appears that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and from perusal of para-56 of the case diary it is also evident that in the FIR a pair of slippers of the petitioner was mentioned but upon investigation no slippers were produced by the informant's side before the Investigating Officer and also the fact that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. So, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and submission of learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83646 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 3/3 counsel for the petitioner, let the above-named petitioner be released on bail, on his furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Jehanabad in connection with Sakurabad P.S. Case No.279 of 2025.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Harshita/- U T