CR. MISC./56012/2025 of Jugesh Patel @ Jugesh Chaudhary @Mahangu Vs The State of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56012 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2023 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Jugesh Patel @ Jugesh Chaudhary @Mahangu S/o Ramadhar Chaudhary
Resident of Village- Kusmha, P.S. Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh
For the State : Mr. Zainul Abedin
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 129 of
2024 arising out of Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 384 of 2023
registered for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC and
27 of the Arms Act and later on Sections 394/411 of the IPC and
25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2025 passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 68450 of 2024, which reads as under:
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 384/2023 registered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56012 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/2
for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Subsequently, 394/411 of Indian Penal Code and
Section 25(1-b)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act has been
added.
3. The petitioner is in jail since 08.09.2023.
4. It has come during investigation that the
petitioner and one Mahangu tried to loot the deceased
and in that occurrence, the deceased was killed.
Materials have come to connect the petitioner with the
crime including the CDR evidence. The petitioner has
similar antecedent also.
5. Considering the nature of allegation
levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the application stands
dismissed.”
4. Four witnesses has already been examined and
the trial is started.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this
case, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.
6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
priyanka/-
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
U T