Patna High Court
Guddu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Guddu Kumar was arrested on 25 April 2025 in connection with a case involving the assault and shooting of an informant's father‑in‑law, alleged under Sections 311 and 312 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner contended that he has a clean antecedent, is not named in the FIR, and was implicated only through a co‑accused's confessional statement. The prosecution opposed bail, while the petitioner highlighted that co‑accused in the same case had already been granted bail. The court examined the facts, noted the petitioner’s clean record and lack of direct naming in the FIR, and considered the principle of bail for non‑violent offences. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate‑II, Gaya.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Sections 311 and 312 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, given his alleged non‑involvement and clean antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 311, 312
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Sections 311
- Sections 312
- false implication
- clean antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2085 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Guddu Kumar Son of Sitaram Yadav Resident of Village- Somiya, P.S.-
Barachatti, Distrtict- Gaya
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Aryan Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Lalan Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
25.04.2025 in connection with Barachatty P.S. Case No. 150 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 25.04.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 311 and 312 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, while the informant
has been carrying garlic in a pickup van, the vehicle suffered a
puncture. While the informant and his father-in-law had been
changing tyre, some miscreants came there and tried to drag
away the informant and in the scuffle the clothes of the
informant was torn. The miscreants also assaulted the father-in-
law of the informant and later on, shot him.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2085 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner is not named
in the F.I.R.. The name of the petitioner has been surfaced on the
basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused person,
namely, Vinay Kumar. He further submits that, co-accused
persons, namely, Suryadeo Kumar and Vinay Kumar have been
granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide
order dated 15.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1026 of 2026
and Cr. Misc. No. 1366 of 2026 respectively. He further submits
that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet
against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since
25.04.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
as well as petitioner having clean antecedent and he is not
named in the FIR, let the petitioner, above named, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2085 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Gaya in
connection with Barachatty P.S. Case No. 150 of 2025, subject
to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…