Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91270 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-517 Year-2025 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Prasad S/O Late Nawal Prasad R/O Vill.- Pilkajariya@Pul Kajariya, P.S- Dhanarua, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Lallu Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case no.517 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his 12 year old son who had gone out did not return nor was any information received. As such the informant states that they started looking for him but he was not to be found. The informant finally received information on his mobile phone from the co-villagers about the dead body of his son having been seen near the dargah in the agricultural field. It is stated that on going there it transpired that he had been killed by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91270 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026 2/3 strangulating him. The informant further states that there was land dispute going on between the informant and the petitioner and the petitioner had given threats. Further there was dispute on and off between the petitioner's wife and son on one hand and the informant's family on the other, every other day. As such the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of pending land dispute between the parties which would be evident from the contents of the FIR itself. No material has transpired in course of investigation to directly or indirectly connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. The petitioner is in custody since 25.8.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and there is allegation against him of having given effect to the occurrence as a result of pending land dispute between the parties.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91270 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026 3/3 that has transpired in course of investigation, there being no eye-witness to the occurrence, the petitioner having remained in custody for over 6 months since 25.8.2025 and chargesheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case no.517 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Masaurhi, District-Patna.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T