Patna High Court
Pinkesh Singh @ Pinkesh Kumar @ PinkeshversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Pinkesh Singh, arrested on 4 August 2025, is charged under Sections 103(1), 238(a) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly killing the son of an informant near a Durga temple and concealing the body. The petitioner contends that the FIR is fabricated and that he is innocent, while the prosecution relies on a co‑accused’s statement and post‑mortem evidence linking him to the shooting. After hearing arguments from both sides, the court examined the material on record, including the case diary and medical report. Finding the prosecution’s evidence sufficient to justify continued detention, the judge declined to grant bail. Consequently, the petition for bail was refused.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the evidence presented.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- murder
- arms act
- false FIR
- evidence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6371 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Pinkesh Singh @ Pinkesh Kumar @ Pinkesh Son of Late Bilayti Singh @
Bilayti Singh Resident of Village - Jagatpura, P.S.- Matihani, District -
Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amritesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-03-2026 Heard Mr. Amritesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Nayan, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
04.08.2025 in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 117 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 22.06.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 238(a) and 3(5) of the BNS and section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along
with other accused persons killed the son of the informant near
Durga Temple and hide his body in the maize field.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6371 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
2/2
present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the F.I.R. It appears from the F.I.R. that the informant
is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis
of material available on record as well as case diary has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the co-accused, namely, Hariom Ram in paragraph
no. 18 of the case diary has stated that the petitioner has fired
upon the victim due to which he died at the place of occurrence
and the same has been confirmed by the medical evidence
(postmortem report).
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection
with Matihani P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025 pending in the court of
learned Principal Sessions Judge, Begusarai.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…