Allowed¶21

Arun Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Aug 2025CR. MISC./30483/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 30483 of 2025, decided 13-08-2025; Arun Mukhiya v. State of Bihar; regular bail application; Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC; Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024, District Muzaffarpur; murder; marpit; improbability of second part of prosecution story; dispute with co-accused Suresh Mukhiya over money transaction; custody since 17.01.2025; fair and clean antecedents; investigation completed; FIR delayed two days; bail bond Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties; Justice Shailendra Singh.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024. ¶21

Arun Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused in Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024 (offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code), should be released on regular bail.

¶14

Court's answer

The Court found the second part of the prosecution story relating to the commission of the murder, showing involvement of this petitioner, to appear somewhat improbable.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Considering the submissions of petitioner's counsel, the apparent improbability of the second part of the prosecution story, the petitioner's custody period, his fair and clean antecedent, and completion of investigation against him, the Court inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted. Arun Mukhiya sought bail in Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024 (Muzaffarpur), registered 15.05.2024 under section 302 read with section 34 IPC. Counsel argued the informant's account — a marpit on the deceased an hour before the murder, after which the deceased allegedly accompanied the accused — was improbable; the money dispute was with co-accused Suresh Mukhiya, not the petitioner; the petitioner, in custody since 17.01.2025 with fair and clean antecedents, had investigation completed against him; and the FIR was lodged two days after the occurrence. The learned APP opposed. Finding the second part of the prosecution story implicating the petitioner somewhat improbable, and noting the custody period, antecedents and completed investigation, Shailendra Singh, J. directed release on bail on a bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two like sureties.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30483 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Arun Mukhiya, Son of Shivnath Mukhiya, R/O Village- Bangra Nizamat, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Rita Verma, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 13-08-2025

¶12

Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the

¶13

petitioner and Ms. Rita Verma, learned APP for the State.

¶14

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024 dated 15.05.2024 registered for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner’s counsel are that the informant claimed himself to be an eyewitness of the commission of the alleged marpit which took place just one hour before the commission of the murder of the deceased but the prosecution story narrated by the informant in the FIR is completely unbelievable as according to him, the deceased was first assaulted by this petitioner and four coaccused persons, which was witnessed by the informant, his

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30483 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/3

¶17

relatives and co-villagers and thereafter, the victim was brought to his house by his family members and one hour later, the victim was again taken by the accused persons after persuading him and the said part is completely unbelievable as why the victim went with them despite the occurrence of marpit having taken place with him by the accused persons just one hour before the occurrence and why his family members permitted the accused persons in taking the victim with them. It is further submitted that in the statement of the material witnesses of the prosecution, who are relatives of the deceased, it has come in the light that the deceased was having a dispute with co-accused Suresh Mukhiya regarding some money transaction and it is not the prosecution’s case that the petitioner had any dispute with the deceased during the relevant time, so, there was no reason for the petitioner to kill the deceased. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 17.01.2025, having fair and clean antecedent and against him the investigation has been completed. It is lastly submitted that the FIR was registered two days after the commission of the alleged occurrence, which shows that a false story was prepared by the prosecution party.

¶18

4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the bail

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30483 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 3/3

¶20

prayer of the petitioner.

¶21

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions advanced by petitioner’s counsel and mainly the fact that in view of petitioner’s counsel’s above contentions the second part of the prosecution story relating to the commission of the murder of the deceased, showing involvement of this petitioner, appears to be some improbable, so, considering this aspect and coupled with petitioner’s custody period, his fair and clean antecedent and completion of investigation against him, this Court is inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2024.

¶22

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶23

annu/-

¶24

U T

Arun Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Kamlesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramkumar Mahto @ Ramkumar @ Ram Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Roy Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Ram Vs The State of Bihar