Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Guddu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to bail and is ordered to be released upon furnishing the prescribed bail bond and sureties.

Summary

Guddu Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (PS Case No. 646 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 109, 140(3), 111 and 61(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act, 2023. The prosecution claimed that the petitioner had hired a contract killer for eight lakh rupees, based on the testimony of an apprehended accomplice. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no injury occurred, and that a similarly situated co‑accused had previously been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the court found the petitioner's arguments persuasive and ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the B.N.S., 2023
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • contract killing
  • Bihar Negotiable Substances Act
  • sections 109, 140(3), 111, 61(2)
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20702 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-646 Year-2025 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Guddu Kumar S/o Late Ramanand Singh @ Ramanand Yadav R/o Sukulpur,
                 P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 646 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 109, 140(3), 111, 61(2) of the B.N.S.,

                   2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that certain

                   unknown miscreants have caught the informant. They were armed

                   with weapons. When the informant raised alarm, one of them was

                   apprehended, who was identified as Saurav Kumar, and he has

                   disclosed that this petitioner has arranged the contract killer at

                   eight lakh rupees.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20702 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also

                     submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that only allegation

                     against the petitioner is that he has surrounded the informant and

                     fled away when the alarm was raised. He further submits that

                     nobody has received any kind of injury. He further submits that

                     similarly situated co-accused has been granted bail by the learned

                     coordinate bench of this court vide Cr. Misc. No. 84227 of 2025.

                     The case of this petitioner stands on similar footing. Moreover, the

                     petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.10.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of one case.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.          The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond

                     of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the

                     like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District &

                     Additional Sessions Judge-XXXIII, Patna in connection with

                     Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 646 of 2025.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

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.