Patna High Court
Hiter Kumar @ Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient substantive evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Hiter Kumar, sought bail in a murder case (PS Case No. 474 of 2024) where he was alleged, along with three others, to have been involved in the killing of the informant's son. The prosecution's case relied solely on the informant's statement and circumstantial evidence, with no eyewitness identification of the petitioner. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedent, and had been in custody since 07-10-2025 without any substantive material linking him to the crime. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the vague and remote nature of the allegations, the absence of direct evidence, and the petitioner's clean record. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other procedural requirements.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of the evidence against the petitioner for denial of bail?
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and prolonged custody justify granting bail?
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 480(3) of the BNSS are applicable in this bail order?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (Special) Act — s. 480(3)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- circumstantial evidence
- suspicion
- clean antecedent
- Section 480(3)
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18453 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2024 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Hiter Kumar @ Raju Kumar Son of Bhushan Rai Resident of Village-
Mahadev Chak, Semariya, P.S.- Koilwar in the district of Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Asha Devi, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Koilwar P.S. Case No. 474 of 2024, registered
on 11.12.2024 for the offences under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of
the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner and two
other coaccused persons came to the doors of the informant and
inquired about the son of the informant but thereafter informant
& her son went to attend the marriage ceremony of the daughter
of the cousin of the informant. After the marriage ceremony was
over, the son of the informant went missing and his dead body
was recovered and informant named the petitioner and three
other coaccused persons along with 2-3 unknown persons for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18453 of 2026(4) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
being involved in the murder of her son.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner in innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this case. There is no eye witness to the
occurrence and the petitioner has been implicated merely on
suspicion. The entire prosecution story is based on
circumstantial evidence and there is no direct or indirect
evidence or any material to show that the petitioner was last
seen with the deceased at the place of occurrence. Therefore,
there is no substantive material against the petitioner to show his
complicity. The evidence of the prosecution has been recorded
but the informant has neither named the petitioner nor identified
the petitioner in the Court. Similarly, PW-2 also did not identify
the petitioner. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he
is in custody since 07.10.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the
submission made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
vague and remote nature of allegation and absence of
substantive material against the petitioner and also considering
his period of custody and clean antecedent, the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18453 of 2026(4) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VIII, Bhojpur at Ara//concerned court, in
connection with Koilwar P.S. Case No. 474 of 2024, subject to
the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and
other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on
each and every date fixed by the court
below, if so required by the learned trial
court.
(iii) In case of absence on three
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.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.