Patna High Court
Jitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that there is no ground to grant bail and no ground to review the earlier order.
Summary
Jitendra Kumar was charged under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for allegedly killing a person with the help of co‑accused. He filed a second bail application after an earlier bail denial. The court noted that three of four witnesses had been examined, but the remaining witness had not appeared for one and a half months, prompting the court to direct the trial judge to take coercive steps to secure the witness’s appearance. Despite the delay, the court found no sufficient ground to grant bail or to revisit its earlier order. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a serious offence involving murder under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the non‑appearance of a witness for an extended period justifies granting bail.
- Whether the earlier bail denial order can be reviewed.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- witness non‑appearance
- trial delay
- serious offence
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14794 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1622 Year-2024 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Son of Suresh Chauhan Resident of Village- Bari, P.S.-
Tengaraila, Naubatpur, District- Patna, Bihar- 801109
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate
Mr. Abhijeet Gautam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 24-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 1622 of 2024
registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 16.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 43929 of 2025 which
reads as follows:-
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 1622 of 2024 registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238,
61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The petitioner and others are said to have
killed the deceased.
4. During investigation, it has come that all
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14794 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/2
the accused persons including the petitioner had caught
hold of the deceased and co-accused Vikas Yadav
strangulated him with a wire.
5. Considering the serious nature of
offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the application stands
dismissed.
4. In the trial, out of four witnesses, three witnesses
have been examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that for the last one and a half months, no witness has been
appearing.
5. In these circumstances, the Trial Judge is directed
to take coercive steps to ensure the appearance of the last
witness so that the trial is not delayed.
6. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier
order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands
rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…