Patna High CourtCR. MISC./88113/2025bail rejected

Amrendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-20Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88113 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Amrendra Kumar Son of Vishishth Narayan Singh @ Vishishth Kumar R/O Village - Gaddopur, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Mahua P.S. Case no. 142 of 2025 registered under section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, three accused persons on a point of pistol looted the informant as also his wife of their belongings as stated in the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of his antecedents. No incriminating article has been recovered from his possession and he is in custody since 13.8.2025. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88113 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026 2/2 for the State who submits that the wife of the petitioner who was also looted when the occurrence was given effect to identified the petitioner on seeing his photograph on which the petitioner was taken into custody and he confessed to his crime.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR and the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after completing one year in custody. (Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U T