Patna High CourtCR. MISC./91140/2025bail rejected

Sanjay Kumar Gupta @ Sanjay Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-19Mr. Justice S. B. P. Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91140 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2024 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar Gupta @ Sanjay Sah S/o Late Bhuilotan Sah @ Bhuilotan Sah R/o Village - Rampur Jurawan, P.S.- Vaishali, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aniket Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 103 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, the sister of the informant was married with Sanjay Kumar Gupta (petitioner) who used to assault and torture her. The informant received information on 17.03.2024 through mobile that petitioner and co-accused persons have killed his sister and disappeared her dead body.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Petitioner has voluntarily surrendered before the learned Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91140 of 2025(3) dt.19-03-2026 2/2 below. The allegations levelled against the petitioner is wrong, false and baseless. Learned counsel further submits that other co-accused person namely, Ajay Sah has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 66880 of 2024. Petitioner is in custody since 24.05.2025 and a statement has been made in para 3 of the bail application that petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. From perusal of the case diary it appears that witnesses have supported the alleged occurrence and stated that there was no good relation between the petitioner and the deceased and the character of the deceased was also not good.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering the seriousness of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, the present bail application stands rejected. However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after the informant's evidence or upon completion of one year in custody.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U T