Krishana Singh @ Krishana Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89567 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2024 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Krishana Singh @ Krishana Kumar S/o Upendra Prasad Singh @ Upendra Singh R/o Village - Patsharma, Hasna Gaddi, P.S - Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Hari Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 89 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 302, 201, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C.
3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 04.07.2025.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit murder of the son of the informant along with other co-accused persons, where occurrence alleged to be taken place due to previous enmities.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89567 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 petitioner submitted that petitioner was not involved in the occurrence and this fact can be gathered from the statement of injured witness namely Chandan Sahni as he while recording his statement during the course of investigation, failed to name this petitioner. It is submitted that thrust of allegation is available against Chhotu Sharma and Rakesh Rai. It is pointed out that informant is not the eye-witness of the actual occurrence of murder. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation of this case is completed, for which charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of fact as informant is not the actual eyewitness of the murder, whereas injured eye-witness Chandan Sahni failed to name this petitioner while recording his statement during occurrence as submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89567 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 aforesaid, where thrust of allegation is available against co-accused Chhotu Sharma and Rakesh Rai, coupled with fact as investigation of this case already completed where petitioner remains in custody since 04.07.2025, accordingly petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 89 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-10th, Muzaffarpur/concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 480(3) of BNSS. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) S.Tripathi/- U T