Patna High Court
Vishwajeet Kumar @ MonuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted at this stage and dismissed the appeal.
Summary
Vishwajeet Kumar appealed against the denial of bail in a murder case where he was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Arms Act and the SC/ST Act. The trial court had rejected his bail plea, and the High Court considered whether bail could be granted despite the trial already being underway and witnesses examined. The appellant argued he was falsely implicated and that no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out. The State and the informant opposed bail, citing direct allegations of firing and the seriousness of the offence. Relying on a Supreme Court precedent that courts should be loath to grant bail once trial commences for serious crimes, the High Court dismissed the appeal, ordered the trial to be expedited, and allowed a future bail application if the trial was not concluded within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of murder when the trial has commenced and prosecution witnesses have been examined.
- Whether the appellant's alleged conduct constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant's criminal antecedent precludes bail in a serious offence.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 126(2), 3(5)
- SC/ST Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- serious offence
- trial stage
- SC/ST Act
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1402 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-889 Year-2024 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna
======================================================
Vishwajeet Kumar @ Monu S/o Rajesh Ram R/o Gali No.84, Quarter No.
214, Simjauri, P.S.- Chitranjan, District- West Bardhaman, West Bengal,
presently residing at New Jaganpura, Adarsh Colony, Near Open Mind
School, P.S.- Ramkrishna Nagar, District- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sangita Devi Wife of Late Binay Kumar Das R/o Village- Lundru, POst-
Deokuli, P.S.- Ichak, District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashank Chandra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
For the Informant : Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 04.03.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Pirbahore
P.S. Case No. 889 of 2024 under Sections 126(2), 103(1), 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the
Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was
rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1402 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the appellant
along with other accused person committed the murder of one
Vinay Kumar Das by firing upon him.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. There is general
and omnibus allegation against the appellant. The appellant is
being dragged in this case merely due to earlier rivalry. Learned
counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant has
not taken the caste name of the informant in public view, hence,
no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out
against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace the
image of the informant in public view. The appellant is in
custody since 30.12.2024 and has one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant, stating that there is direct allegation of firing against
the appellant. Learned counsel for the informant further
contended that trial is going on and three witnesses have also
been examined and therefore, the appellant does not deserve to
be released on bail. Learned SPP for the State relied upon a
decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1402 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
OnLine SC 3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein
in paragraph no. 14, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held has under:
“14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape,
murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and
the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the
Court, be it the Trial Court or the High Court
should be loath in entertaining the bail application
of the accused.”
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, direct allegation against the appellant as also the
present stage of trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to
the appellant.
7. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
9. However, if the trial is not concluded within next
three months, liberty is granted to the appellant to renew his
prayer for grant of bail before the learned court below itself.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…