Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 40128 (PAT)

Nawal Ray v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./77014/2025 · 2026-02-11

Sandeep Kumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77014 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-494 Year-2024 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Nawal Ray S/o Manjar Rai @ Mangar Rai R/o vill - Manjhauli, P.S.- Bidupur, Distt.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar For the Informant : Mr. Pramod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 11-02-2026 Heard the parties. 2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 91 of 2025 arising out of Bidupur P.S. Case No. 494 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 109, 123, 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 07.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13170 of 2025 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No.494 of 2024 registered for the offence under sections 109, 123, 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023. 3. The petitioner and other accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77014 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 persons are said to have killed three persons by poisoning. The petitioner is in custody since 30.09.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the father of co- accused Jitendra Kumar and he is not involved in the crime. 5. During investigation materials have come to connect the petitioner with the crime. 6. In view of the aforesaid, this bail application is rejected 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the State and the Informant that in the trial, out of 12 witnesses, 3 witnesses have already been examined. 4. In view of the fact that the trial is progressing, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. vikas/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U