Patna High Court
Bikash Kumar @ Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court dismissed the bail application, refusing to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Bikash Kumar was charged under Sections 307, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting an informant and his son, resulting in the son's death. He has been in custody since July 2023 and this was his third application for regular bail. The trial has progressed with only two of seven witnesses examined. The petitioner argued that the ongoing trial and Supreme Court precedent in X vs. State of Rajasthan should merit bail. The court, noting that the petitioner is the alleged assailant of the deceased and that the trial is still underway, declined to grant bail, directing the trial court to expedite proceedings and ensure witness attendance. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused charged with murder and attempt to murder while the trial is pending
- Whether the fact that only two of seven witnesses have been examined affects the bail decision
- Whether the Supreme Court decision in X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. is applicable to deny bail in the present case
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- attempted murder
- IPC
- Section 307
- Section 302
- Section 34
- trial proceedings
- witness examination
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1360 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18811 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2023 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
======================================================
Bikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar S/O Pannalal Ram Resident of Village -
Dhum Nagar, Noniarwan Tola, Police Station- Nautan, Dist- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shiv Sager Sharma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the third attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Nautan
P.S. Case No.274 of 2023 registered for the offence under
sections 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier, the bail applications of the petitioner
were rejected by this Court vide orders dated 14.03.2024 and
12.05.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.18456 of
2024 and 18811 of 2025. The order dated 12.05.2025, by which
the bail application of the petitioner was rejected for the second
time reads as under:-
“Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1360 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the
petitioner. Earlier the bail application of the
petitioner was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench
of this Court vide order dated 14.03.2024
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18456 of 2024.
3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a
case registered for the offence under Sections
307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. As per the prosecution case, the
petitioner is said to have assaulted the
informant and his son as a result of which the
son of the informant died during the course of
treatment.
5. In the trial, the charge has been
framed on 04.04.2025. The petitioner is in
custody since 07.07.2023.
6. Since the petitioner is the assailant of
the deceased, I am not inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for
regular bail is hereby rejected.
7. The court below is directed to
expedite the trial of the petitioner.
8. The Superintendent of Police, West
Champaran is directed to ensure the
attendance of the witnesses in the trial.
9. Let a copy of this order be
communicated to the Superintendent of Police,
West Champaran through FAX for its
compliance forthwith.”
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for
the petitioners that out of seven witnesses, two witnesses have
been examined in the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1360 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
5. Considering the fact that the trial is
proceeding and also the law laid down down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, I am not inclined to
review my earlier order. Accordingly, this bail application is
dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.