Patna High Court
Abhijeet Raj @ Abhijeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to cash bond, sureties and conditions, pending further investigation.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhijeet Raj, was named in an FIR for murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He contended that he was not an eyewitness, that the FIR confused his identity with another person named Abhijeet Kumar, and that CCTV footage was of poor quality and did not clearly identify him. The petitioner, a 23‑year‑old B.Tech student with a clean record, sought anticipatory bail, arguing lack of material linking him to the crime and his willingness to cooperate. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the evidence presented in a related trial. The Court, after considering the submissions and the precedent of a similar bail order, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 438 of the CrPC, with a provision for cancellation if he fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the allegations of murder and arms offences.
- Whether the identification of the petitioner from the FIR and CCTV footage is sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 438, 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- Arms Act
- CCTV identification
- student petitioner
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14308 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2023 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
Abhijeet Raj @ Abhijeet Kumar Son of Late Ajay Kumar Singh R/o Vill. -
Surya Mandir Road, Srirampur, Sirirampur, Bihta, P.S. - Bihta, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Mukul Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Lal Babu Singh, Advocate
Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 27 of the
Arms Act, 1959.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a young
boy aged about 23 years and the informant alleges that
petitioner along with five named accused persons and some
unknown accused shot his grandson near the Chowmin Shop
leading to his death.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14308 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/6
that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that informant is grandfather of the deceased
and he alleges that his grandson was shot dead by the accused
persons but then is not an eyewitness to the occurence as from
the FIR itself it manifests that the public disclosed the name of
the assailants who committed the occurrence of murder. It is
further submitted that no doubt, Abhijeet Kumar, resident of
Shivpuri, is an accused in the FIR by name but then the
parentage of Abhijeet Kumar is not dislcosed in the FIR. It is
next submitted that the name of the petitioner is Abhijeet Raj @
Abhijeet Kumar and not Abhijeet Kumar and he is son of Late
Ajay Kumar Singh and is resident of Surya Mandir Road
Srirampur, Sirirampur, Bihta, Police Station Bihta, District
Patna. It is next submitted that petitioner was not even aware
that an FIR has been instituted in which the police without
investigating the case in its correct perspective is looking for the
petitioner. It is also submitted that during the course of
investigation Aman, Shivji and Avinash were arrested and from
perusal of their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.,
it would manifest that they have named one Abhijeet Kumar but
then have not dislcosed the parentage and have stated that he is
resident of Shivpuri. It is asserted and submitted that even the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14308 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/6
apprehended accused have not dislcosed that Abhijeet Kumar
who was involved in the occurrence is a resident of Bihta. It is
next submitted and assereted that during the course of
investigation, no material transpired even to remotly connect the
petitioner with the offence on the ground that he is a resident of
Shivpuri in the district of Patna. It is also submitted that during
the course of investigation, it has come that bystanders from the
CCTV footage had identified the assailants of the deceased and
the petitioner was also identified. It is further submitted that if
what has come during the course of investigation that petitioner
was identified based on CCTV footage by bystanders in that
event definitely the case is not for anticipatory bail but then it is
submitted that Shivji was arrested and was convicted by the
learned trial court by judgment dated 04.09.2025 in S.Tr. No.
1012 of 2023. It is next submitted that in the trial, the
Investigating Officer was cross-examined and stated that he had
seen the CCTV footage but the CCTV Camera was of low
quality in which three bikes were visible, people were coming
but faces were not clearly visible which amply demonstrates
that the petitioner was not identified based on the CCTV
footage. It is also submitted that the informant of the case was
also cross-examined in the trial of Shivji and dislcosed that he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14308 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
4/6
had identified the assailant of his grandson but was not knowing
his name but in the trial he identified Shivji as the assailant and
also stated that he had not seen any other accused persons. It is
further submitted that petitioner is a student and presently is
pursuing his B.Tech. (Computer Science) from Sharda
University, Greater Noida as would manifest from Annexure-P/4
to the anticipatory bail application. It is next submited that in
support of the fact that petitioner is a student his marks of +2
has also been annexed as Annexure-P/3 to the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the evidence
which came in the trial of Shivji cannot be looked into in the
trial which shall be conducted against the petitioner on which
learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that the said submission of the learned A.P.P. cannot be
disputed but then Anand Kumar Singh @ Anand had
approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
Misc. No. 22117 of 2023 and the same came to be allowed by
an order dated 11.07.2023. It is fairly submitted that the only
difference in the case of petitioner and Anand Kumar Singh @
Anand is that the apprehended accused in their statements
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14308 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
5/6
recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. had not disclosed the name
of Anand Kumar Singh @ Anand but the same is true also for
the petitioner as the apprehended accused had disclosed the
name of Abhijeet Kumar and not Abhijeet Raj @ Abhijeet
Kumar nor anything during the course of investigation
transpired connecting the petitioner that he is a resident of
Shivpuri. It is next submitted that though what transpired in the
trial of Shivji will not come by way of aid to the petitioner if the
trial against him also commences but then for the purposes of
anticipatory bail and considering the fact that petitioner is a
student and the manner in which he has been implicated should
also be taken into consideration. It is also submitted that
petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the
investigation to prove his innocence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Senior Counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of
six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is
pending/Successor Court in connection with Shastri Nagar P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14308 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
6/6
Case No. 116 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
uncle (Mama), namely, Sunny Kumar.
8. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating
Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial
Court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving
assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation,
the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.