Amarjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89824 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2025 Thana- Singhaul District- Begusarai ====================================================== Amarjeet Kumar S/o- Vijay Rajak Resident of village- Rachiyahi Dhobi Tola Police station- Singhoul District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Anand Kishor Choudhary, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Singhaul P. S. Case No. 112 of 2025 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 103(1), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner along with 2-3 unknown persons committed murder of the son of informant by strangulation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence and petitioner has been made accused in this case only on suspicion. It is further submitted that co-accused Guriya Devi, who called the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89824 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026 2/2 deceased and took him to orchard, has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 76436 of 2025. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since 03.07.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and during investigation it has come that it was this petitioner who killed the deceased. Petitioner cannot claim parity with coaccused Guriya Devi for the simple reason that there is no allegation that she participated in the commission of offence.

6. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

7. However, since petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T