Subham Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85338 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Subham Kumar Son of Rajesh Kumar @ Pampam R/o Village - Naubatpur Field, P.S. - Naubatpur, District -Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026 Heard Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 07.01.2025 in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 12.02.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and later on Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

3. According to prosecution case, two miscreants came at the medicine shop of the informant where the informant along with his father were sitting and one of the miscreant fired upon the informant's father and fled away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85338 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that petitioner was initially not named in the FIR but during investigation on the basis of the CCTV footage his name has been transpired where the informant has identified the petitioner. Except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. Even the informant has not handed over the said CCTV footage to the prosecution and due to some previous dispute the informant has implicated the petitioner reason best known to the informant itself.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the informant has identified the miscreants who shot fire upon the father of the informant and the police have apprehended the co-accused persons. Later on, the said coaccused person and this petitioner have confessed their guilt in the present crime in question and they have also confirmed the police that the arm which was used in the present crime in question has been provided by the co-accused, namely, Vikas Singh. Thereafter, the confessional statement of Vikas Singh was also recorded. Apart from that the petitioner carries twelve

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85338 of 2025(4) dt.25-03-2026 3/3 cases of almost similar nature other than the present one.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Danapur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T