Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sunny KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court dismissed the bail application, finding no new ground to review the earlier order rejecting bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunny Kumar, sought regular bail for offences under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 27, 25(1‑b)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act. The earlier bail application had been rejected, with the court noting a confessional statement implicating the petitioner and co‑accused in a shooting and arms supply. The petitioner filed a second bail application, but the court found that no new material or ground was presented to revisit the earlier decision. Consequently, the court dismissed the bail application, emphasizing that the order was limited to this bail matter and did not prejudice the trial. No opinion on the merits of the case was expressed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in view of the confessional statement and the seriousness of the offences under the BNS Act and Arms Act
  • Whether any new ground exists to review the earlier bail denial

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • confessional statement
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • Arms Act
  • high court
  • no new ground
  • bail dismissal

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20042 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-895 Year-2024 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Sunny Kumar son of Bishu Paswan @ Vishu Paswan R/O- Laddu Akhara,
                 Near Gas Godown PS -Alamganj Dist -Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Mithilesh Kumar Arya
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mohammed Arif
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Pavan Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-04-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                   2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No.

                   895 of 2024 / S.Tr. No. 1309 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of the BNS and under Section 27

                   of the Arms Act. Later on Section 25(1-b)a, 26 of the Arms Act

                   was also added. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was

                   rejected vide order dated 18.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

                   49656 of 2025. Paragraph no. 5 of the order dated 18.08.2025

                   reads as under:-

                                                   “Learned APP for the State as well as
                                   the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently
                                   opposed the bail petition of the petitioner. In
                                   paragraph 25 of the case diary, the confessional
                                   statement of the petitioner is mentioned in which he
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20042 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                                    disclosed that the co-accused, Sunny Kumar fired upon
                                    the victim, the arms was supplied to him by the co-
                                    accused Shiv Kumar and Rohit Pandey. Further the co-
                                    accused Sanjeet Kumar @ Sanjeet Yadav gave Rs.
                                    5000/- to the co-accused, Sunny Kumar as an advance
                                    to kill Rajeev Ratan Gupta. Earlier the regular bail
                                    application of the other co-accused persons were
                                    rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
                                    order dated 13.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10643
                                    of 2025.”
                                    3.    From perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, it

                    appears that the materials have been considered on the last

                    occasion.

                                    4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court does

                    not find any new ground to review the earlier order passed by

                    this Court rejecting the bail application of the peetitioner.

                                    5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

                                     6. It is, however, clarified that the observations

                    made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail

                    application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at

                    any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not

                    expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                             (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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