Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89329 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-701 Year-2023 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Yadav S/o Late Mahendra Yadav @ Mahendra Gop R/o Village- Surangaper, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2026 Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Vijay Anand for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 04.01.2025. It is next submitted that no doubt two persons in the occurrence died but then from perusal of the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation of firing is alleged against the petitioner. It is also submitted that similarly situated co-accused have been granted the privilege of regular bail as stands recorded in the order dated 29.08.2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.46059 of 2025 whereby regular bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected. It is next submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89329 of 2025(2) dt.11-03-2026 2/2 consideration which weighed with the Court for not granting the privilege of regular bail to the petitioner was his criminal antecedents but then merely because petitioner has antecedents that in itself cannot be a ground to deny the privilege of bail to an accused against whom the allegation of killing is not specific.

3. The learned APP opposes the bail application and submits that since petitioner has three criminal antecedents, as such, if privilege of regular bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No.701 of 2023, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-II, Patna City.

5. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T