Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Makhan Kumar @ MakhanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Makhan Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in connection with FIR No. 86 of 2025, which alleges his participation in a firearm‑related murder. The FIR charges him under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, with later additions of Section 103 of the BNS and Sections 25(1‑Ba), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution relied on self‑inculpatory statements of co‑accused Shintu and Mithun, asserting that the petitioner was involved in planning and conspiracy to commit the murder. The Court, considering the seriousness of the offences, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks and seek regular bail. The order is limited to the anticipatory bail application and does not prejudice any later proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature and gravity of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
  • Whether the petitioner’s alleged participation in planning and conspiracy justifies denial of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • conspiracy
  • murder
  • firearm
  • criminal procedure
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1826 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2025 Thana- Chitragupta Nagar District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Makhan Kumar @ Makhan Son of Rupesh Kumar Singh @ Rupesh Singh
                 Village- Sanhauli, Ward No 25, PS -Chitragupta Nagar, Distt- Khagaria

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   24-02-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

                   learned APP for the State, and the learned counsel for the

                   informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

                   Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025, registered for

                   offences under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 61(2), and 3(5) of

                   the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 27 of the Arms

                   Act. Later, Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,

                   and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, and 35 of the Arms Act were added.

                                3. The allegation against the named FIR accused

                   persons including the petitioner is of killing the deceased by

                   firearm. During the investigation, the involvement of the

                   petitioner (Makhan Kumar @ Makhan) and co-accused Shivam
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1826 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      Kumar emerged from the self-inculpatory statements of co-

                      accused Shintu and Mithun. The petitioner participated in

                      planning and conspiracy to commit the murder.

                                   4. Considering the nature and the gravity of the

                      offence, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of

                      anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

                                   5. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is

                      hereby rejected.

                                   6. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court

                      below within a period of four weeks from today and seek

                      regular bail, failing which the Superintendent of Police,

                      Khagaria will take all steps for the arrest of the petitioner.

                                   7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

                      herein are limited to the adjudication of the present application

                      and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any

                      subsequent stage of the proceedings.

                                   8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the

                      Superintendent of Police, Khagaria through FAX for its

                      compliance forthwith.



                                                         (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.