Narendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Deptt. Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Bihar,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3273 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- ====================================================== Narendra Kumar Singh S/o Sri Shatrughna Singh @ Shatrughan Singh R/o Village - Murli Sirisiya, P.S.- Parsa, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Goverment of Bihar, Patna, Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Home Affairs, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, Bihar 3.

The Additional Secretary, Deptt. of Home Affairs, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, Bihar 4.

The District Magistrate, Saran, Chhapra, Saran 5.

The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna, Bihar 6.

The Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur, Bihar 7.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Saran Range, Chhapra, Saran, Bihar 8.

The Superintendent of Police, Saran, Chhapra, Saran 9.

The Director General of Police, Haryana, Haryana Police Headquarters, Sector 6, Panchkula, Haryana Bihar 10.

The Officer-in-Charge, Cyber Crime Police Station, Sector 8, District Kurukshetra, Haryana ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, AC to A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) 19-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AG for the State.

2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to

2/4 produce the petitioner's brother, namely, Sushil Kumar Singh who has been arrested and detained by the respondents allegedly in gross violation of the Fundamental Rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.

3. It is evident that the brother of the petitioner was arrested on 24.08.2025. He was kept in the Hajat of Parsa Police Station whereafter he was taken to the State of Haryana in connection with Cyber Thana Crime Case No. 43 of 2025 registered at Kurukshetra, Haryana. The copy of the FIR has been enclosed as Anneuxre 'P/1' to the writ application.

4. There is a specific statement in paragraph '16' of the writ application that the petitioner is pursuing the bail application of his brother Sushil Kumar Singh in the learned District Court, Kurukshetra.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail has been rejected by the learned District Court, Kurukshetra. He has relied upon the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by this Court in the case of Shakeela Parveen Vs. The State of Bihar and Others (Cr.WJC No. 2285 of 2025). It is submitted on the strength of the said order of this Court that the case of the petitioner is similarly situated.

6. On the other hand, learned AC to AG for the State

3/4 submits that the petitioner has moved this Court after almost four months of his arrest and remand by the competent court in connection with the Cyber Crime Kurukshetra P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025. His prayer for bail has been refused by the learned District Court at Kurukshetra. Under such circumstance, this Court may not entertain the present writ application.

7. The case of the brother of the petitioner has been distinguished with that of the case of Shakeela Parveen (supra). It is submitted that in the said case, the accused was picked up by police on 28.08.2025 and was brought to Shastri Nagar Police Station whereafter he was taken on transit remand but even before he could have been remanded, the petitioner had approached this Court in a Writ of Habeas Corpus. This Court passed the order dated 04.09.2025 taking note of the grounds pleaded before this Court as it was found that the Haryana Police had not followed the procedures required by law.

8. Having regard to the submissions noted hereinabove and on going through the averments made in the writ application, we are of the considered opinion that at this belated stage when the brother of the petitioner has already been remanded and his prayer for bail has been refused by the

4/4 learned District Court, Kurukshetra, Haryana, a writ in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus is not fit to be entertained by this Court.

9. This writ application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) (Sourendra Pandey, J) lekhi/- U