Patna High Court
Anand Prakash @ Mukhiya JeeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Anand Prakash, accused of murder, criminal conspiracy and illegal possession of arms, applied for regular bail. The prosecution alleged that he and another person fired at the informant’s brother, who later died from his injuries. The petitioner claimed innocence, lack of witnesses, and that the FIR was lodged after the post‑mortem, while also noting he had been in judicial custody since March 2025. The State highlighted direct allegations, the post‑mortem findings, the earlier denial of bail to a co‑accused, and the petitioner’s prior absconding before surrendering. The court, after considering these factors, rejected the bail application, permitting a fresh application after nine months if the trial remains pending, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused in a murder and conspiracy case involving the Arms Act
- Whether the absence of witnesses and the timing of the FIR justify bail
- Impact of the accused’s prior absconding and surrender on bail eligibility
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- Arms Act
- regular bail
- absconding
- trial expeditious
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12596 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2023 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
Anand Prakash @ Mukhiya Jee S/o Birendra Singh R/o Village - Utrama, P.S
- Kurtha, District - Arwal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rasika, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ram Pravesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in
connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 139 of 2023 instituted
for the offence under Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that while the
informant was returning with his brother, it is alleged that one
Raushan fired at the cheek of the brother of the informant. It is
further alleged that this petitioner and one Ram Pravesh have
fired at the chest of the informant’ brother. The brother of the
informant succumbed to the injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12596 of 2026(4) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has further
submitted that the occurrence is of dark night and no one is
witness to this occurrence. The FIR was lodged after
postmortem. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 18.03.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
of regular bail and learned counsel for the informant has
submitted that there is direct allegation against this petitioner
and one Ram Pravesh Mahto of firing at chest of the deceased.
From perusal of the postmortem report, it also transpires that the
deceased has received injuries on those parts of the body. It has
further been submitted that the bail application of co-accused
Ram Pravesh Mahto has already been rejected by learned co-
ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 82895 of 2024.
It has further been submitted that the petitioner was absconding
and has recently surrendered.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and considering the facts and cirumstances of this case as stated
above, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail
at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12596 of 2026(4) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
his prayer for bail after nine months if the trial is not concluded.
8. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same within the stipulated period of time.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…