Patna High Court

Anuj Kumar @ Anup KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 April 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

The court held that bail could not be granted in the present murder case.

Summary

Anuj Kumar was arrested on 19 February 2025 in connection with a murder alleged to have occurred on 18 February 2025, where he is accused of killing the wife of the informant with a sharp weapon. The petitioner sought bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was fabricated. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on eyewitness testimony from the informant's mother and sister and the seriousness of the charges under Sections 126, 103(1), 115(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, supported by medical evidence. The High Court examined the facts and evidence and concluded that the gravity of the offence and the strength of the prosecution’s case did not justify release on bail. Consequently, the bail application was refused and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case under Sections 126, 103(1), 115(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 considering the evidence and seriousness of the offence.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 115(1), 126, 351(2)

Subjects

bail
murder
criminal procedure
Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
medical evidence
trial expedite

Judgment

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1876 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- BHADHWAR District- Gaya
               ======================================================
               Anuj Kumar @ Anup Kumar Son of Mithilesh Paswan Resident of Village -
               Nandai, P.S.- Bhadwar, District – Gaya.             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
               The State of Bihar                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
               ======================================================
               Appearance :
               For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
               For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
               For the Informant        :      Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
               ======================================================
               CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                     ORAL ORDER

4 09-04-2026                    Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned counsel for

               the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary,learned A.P.P. for the

               State and Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

               Informant.

                              2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

               19.02.2025 in connection with Bhadwar P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025,

               FIR dated 19.02.2025 registered for the offence under Section 126,

               103(1), 115(1), 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

                              3. The allegation against the petitioner is that when

               husband of the deceased went outside for work then on 18.02.2025

               at about 3:30 P.M, the petitioner entered his house and murdered

               his wife by means of sharp cutting weapon.

                              4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

               submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely

               been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1876 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                  as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has

                  not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. and the

                  petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 19.02.2025.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned

                  counsel for the Informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for

                  bail of the petitioner and submits that mother and sister of the

                  informant had seen the occurrence and thereafter they informed the

                  informant about the incident and from bare perusal of FIR it

                  appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the

                  petitioner that he committed murder of the wife of the informant.

                                   6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

                  supported by medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the

                  petitioner on bail in connection with Bhadwar P.S. Case No. 09 of

                  2025, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-IV,

                  Sherghati(Gayaji).

                               7. Prayer is refused.

                               8. However the learned Trial Court is directed to

                  expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…