IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91728 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas ======================================================

Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Gupta Son of Satish Kumar Gupta Permanent Address- 23/407, Trilokipuri, Chilliyan Sarawada Khadar (East Delhi), at present Village- Dinara, Nahar Diiya, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Session Trial No. 249 of 2025 arising out of Dinara P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences under Section 137 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and later on added Sections 103(1), 61, 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

03. As per prosecution case, the brother of the informant went with the petitioner on 09.02.2025 and did not return. Subsequently, during investigation, it transpired that petitioner and the wife of the deceased were in illicit relationship and the petitioner murdered the brother of the informant.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. The petitioner has been named in this case merely on suspicion. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The police forcibly recorded the confessional statement of the petitioner and co-accused wife of the deceased and made them accused in the present case. The petitioner has no concern with the wife of the deceased. Charge-sheet has been submitted. The petitioner is having clean antecedent and is in custody since

16.10.2025.

05. Learned APP for the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that the petitioner slit the neck of the brother of the informant in order to continue his relationship with the wife of the deceased. Learned APP further submits that the deceased was last seen in the company of the petitioner and it is strong circumstantial evidence after recovery of his dead body.

06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the seriousness of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, his prayer for bail is rejected.

07. The learned trial court concerned is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Ashish/- U T