Patna High Court
Sanjay Sharma @ Sanjay Kumar VishwakarmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Sharma, was in custody for offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 337, 338, 504, 34 and later 302, relating to an assault that led to the death of the informant's brother. He had previously been denied bail, but an earlier order allowed him to renew his bail application after six months or upon framing of charges, whichever was later. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated in a land‑dispute‑related case, had no criminal antecedent, and that a co‑accused had already been granted bail. The prosecution opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges, especially the homicide. Considering that charges had been framed, the elapsed time, the petitioner's clean record, and the precedent of bail to a co‑accused, the court granted bail with a Rs.10,000 bond and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences, including murder under IPC Section 302
- Whether the passage of six months since the previous bail denial and framing of charges warrants bail
- Whether the petitioner's claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedent affect the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 323, 337, 338, 34, 341, 504
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- murder
- attempt to murder
- assault
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12835 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2023 Thana- VIJAYEPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Sanjay Sharma @ Sanjay Kumar Vishwakarma Son of Parmanand Sharma @
Parma Sharma @ Parmanand Vishwakarma Resident of Village- Vilarua
(Vilaura), P.s.- Vijaipur (Vijaypur), District- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant
of regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Vijaipur (Vijaypur) P.S. Case No. 259 of 2023
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
307, 337, 338, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added.
4. It has been submitted that vide order dated
22.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.32131 of 2025, the petitioner
was granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months
or on framing of charge, whichever is later.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12835 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
only the charges have been framed but it has been more than six
months since rejection of his previous bail application.
6. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
stated that nine named accused persons, including the petitioner,
surrounded the informant and others. As a result of assault
caused by co-accused one Krishna Sharma and the petitioner,
the informant's brother sustained serious injuries and the rest of
the accused persons were accused of assaulting the other
persons and subsequently, during the course of treatment, the
brother of the informant succumbed to his injuries.
7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this
case and there is a general and omnibus allegation of causing
injury to the brother of the informant against the petitioner as
well as the other co-accused, Krishna Sharma. Learned counsel
has further pointed out that similarly situated co-accused
Krishna Sharma has already been granted bail vide order dated
20.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 87019 of 2024. It has been
submitted that there is a land dispute between the parties and
both are agnates and only to settle the dispute this false case has
been lodged against the petitioner. It is lastly submitted that the
petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12835 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
21.01.2025.
8. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and has submitted that there are serious
allegations against the petitioner to have assaulted the brother of
the informant, who died during the course of treatment.
9. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
parties and taking into account that the charges have already
been framed, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Vijaipur (Vijaypur) P.S. Case No. 259 of 2023,
subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
relative and the other shall be local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12835 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However,
the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-
mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or
in the name of verification.
10. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
11. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.