Patna High Court

Anshu Aman SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Bail was denied as there were no new grounds and the offences were of a serious nature.

Summary

The petitioner, Anshu Aman Singh, was arrested in connection with a double murder case (Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024) and charged under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He has been in judicial custody since 10 September 2024 and this was his second application for regular bail after an earlier denial by the same court. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he has no prior criminal record and that the trial is unlikely to conclude soon, warranting bail. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the gravity of the double‑murder charges and the lack of any new material to revisit the earlier decision. The court found no fresh ground to reconsider the bail application and upheld the earlier order rejecting bail. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed, with a direction to the trial court to expedite the trial within six months, after which the petitioner may file a fresh bail application if needed.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted in a case involving double murder, criminal conspiracy and unlawful use of arms.
Whether the petitioner has raised any new ground that warrants a fresh consideration of bail.
Whether the seriousness of the offences outweighs the petitioner’s right to bail pending trial.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34

Subjects

bail
double murder
criminal conspiracy
Arms Act
judicial custody
trial expedite
IPC

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10637 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Anshu Aman Singh S/o- Sri Gauram Singh R/v- Nenaur Ps- Sahar Dist-
                 Bhojpur at Ara

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Abhay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-02-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                           2.       The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024 instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 302, 120(B) & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                           3.       This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.

                   The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail

                   which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order

                   dated 28.04.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27271 of 2025, taking

                   into account the nature of accusation and the gravity of the

                   offence as also there being specific allegation against the

                   petitioner of firing.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10637 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                              4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                     petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.09.2024,

                     without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent.

                     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no

                     likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence,

                     petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

                              6.     Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                     grant of bail. It is mainly submitted that the present one is the

                     case of double murder, hence, petitioner does not deserve the

                     privilege of bail.

                              7.     There is no new ground to consider the bail petition

                     of the petitioner, which is already decided by this Court on

                     merit.

                              8.     In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the

                     petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to

                     expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously

                     preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial

                     is not concluded within the period of six months, as stated

                     above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before

                     the court below.



Raj Kishore/-                                                    (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…