Dipu Kumar @ Deepu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90651 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2025 Thana- DAWATH District- Rohtas ====================================================== DIPU KUMAR @ DEEPU KUMAR S/o Vimal Pal Resident of VillageMandhura, Police Station- Garahani, District- Bhojpur at Arra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant found his daughter critically injured and bleeding on the rooftop of their house, along with the petitioner. Both were taken to the hospital, where Soni Kumari was declared dead, while the petitioner was admitted with injuries. It is alleged that the petitioner killed Soni Kumari with a knife and then attempted to commit suicide by injuring himself.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90651 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner and informant's daughter were in love and both of them have tried to commit suicide. It is further submitted that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation of giving knife blow to the informant's daughter levelled against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T