Patna High Court
SANJAY KUMAR JHAversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Jha, was charged with indiscriminate firing that caused the instantaneous death of two persons and injuries to three others. He applied for bail, arguing that the case had been pending since February 2024, only six of nineteen witnesses had been examined, and there were discrepancies in the FIR suggesting possible false implication. The State, represented by the informant's counsel and the Additional Public Prosecutor, contended that the offence was grave and the petitioner should not be released on bail. The court examined the seriousness of the accusations and the risk to public safety, concluding that the nature of the alleged crime warranted continued detention. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, with the court urging the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving indiscriminate firing resulting in deaths and injuries
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- firearms offence
- murder
- attempted murder
- investigation discrepancies
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84228 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2024 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar Jha Son of Late Braj Kishor Jha, Residence of Mohalla -
Sudai, P.S.- Phulparas, Dist.- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. D.K. Sinha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Kedar Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Renu Jha, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. D.K. Sinha, learned Senior Advocate along
with Mr. Kedar Jha, learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as Mr.
Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. Renu Jha,
learned Advocate for the informant.
2. This is the second attempt made on behalf of the
petitioner, as earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was
turned down by this Court vide order dated 04.10.2024 in Cr.
Misc. No. 70869 of 2024, taking note of the specific accusation
against the petitioner of causing indiscriminate firing, leading to
instantaneous death of two persons and firearm injuries to other
three persons.
3. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner fairly
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84228 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
contended that since the prayer of the petitioner was earlier
rejected on merit, and as such he is not making any submission
touching the merit of the case. However, this fact cannot be
ignored that the petitioner has been incarcerated since
08.02.2024, and till date out of 19 witnesses only six witnesses
have been examined. Whatever the occurrence which took
place, that was on a heat of rage and the death of the deceased
was unfortunate but enmity between the parties may be a good
reason for false implication of the petitioner. Moreover, there
are various other discrepancies in the lodging of the FIR and the
investigation. It has also been submitted that the very object of
the bail is neither punitive nor preventive, and the deprivation of
liberty must be considered as a punishment unless it can be
required to ensure that the accused person will stand his trial
when called upon.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Ramakant Sharma, the
learned Senior Advocate for the informant and the learned APP
for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and
submitted that this is a case which is glaring in the nature where
the petitioner has caused indiscriminate firing resulting into
instantaneous death of two persons and bullet injuries to three
other persons. Thus, in no circumstances, the petitioner deserve
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84228 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
to be enlarged on bail. The trial is in progress and it will be
concluded in its due course.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Senior Advocates for the petitioner as well as the
informant and also the learned APP for the State and taking note
of the specific accusation of firing against the petitioner, which
proved fatal for two persons and caused severe bullet injuries to
three other persons, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for
bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer is rejected.
6. However, it is expected that the learned Trial Court
shall take all endeavours to expedite the trial and conclude the
same as early as possible.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U T
Checking your session…