Patna High CourtCR. MISC./86217/2025bail rejected

Rajeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86217 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2023 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Rajeev Kumar S/O Late Bachan Chaudhary R/O Village- Sidhwal, P.SHussainganj, Distt.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP For the Informant :

Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard learned 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 341, 307, 447, 302, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this petitioner, along with co-accused Mohit Kumar and Arun Kumar Yadav, assaulted the deceased with iron rod.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Moreover, charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86217 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, along with other accused persons, assaulted father of informant with iron rod due to which, he died. Petitioner has got three criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence 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 01.08.2025, 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