Patna High Court

Ajay DasversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 April 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: SANDEEP KUMAR

Holding

The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s alleged absconding preclude bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Ajay Das, was charged under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged murder of the informant's son, who had been in a relationship with Sudha Kumari and disappeared after a visit. The petitioner claimed innocence, citing that a co-accused had been acquitted and that key witnesses had turned hostile, and sought regular bail after being in custody since December 2, 2025. The State opposed bail, alleging that the petitioner had called the deceased before the killing and that the petitioner was an absconder. The court examined the submissions and noted that the acquittal of a co-accused does not warrant bail when the petitioner is an absconder and the offences are serious. Consequently, the court declined to grant regular bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail can be granted to the petitioner accused of murder and related offences given the seriousness of the charges and the allegation of absconding
Whether the acquittal of a co-accused and hostile witnesses justify granting bail

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34

Subjects

bail
murder
IPC
absconder
hostile witnesses
co-accused acquitted

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21221 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2022 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Ajay Das S/O Paltu Das Resident of Village- Nayagaon Parsama, P.S. Aurai,
                 District- Muzaffarpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Manish Kumar No 13
                                                   Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate
                                                   Mrs. Shreya, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Rajesh Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-04-2026                   Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Aurai P.S. Case No. 257 of 2022 registered for the offence under

                   Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the son of the

                   informant was in love with one Sudha Kumari and used to talk

                   to her on the mobile phone. Two days after the Chhath Festival,

                   he came to Parsama from Ludhiana after the girl called him.

                   After having dinner, he left the house and did not return home.

                   The informant alleges that all the named accused persons,

                   including the petitioner, killed her son.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21221 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence.

          Petitioner is in custody since 02.12.2025. It is further submitted

          that a co-accused has been acquitted; therefore, the petitioner

          deserves bail, as the witnesses have turned hostile.

                       5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes

          the bail application and submits that it has come during

          investigation that the deceased was called by the petitioner and

          was subsequently killed because he was in a relationship with

          Sudha Kumari. He further submits that the petitioner is also an

          absconder.

                       6. I have considered the submissions of the parties and

          have gone through the records of the case. The acquittal of a co-

          accused is not a ground for grant of bail when the petitioner was

          an absconder.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is

          not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

                       8. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands

          rejected.

                       9. It is made clear that any observation made herein is

          prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of

          adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21221 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case

                      and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any

                      manner.



                                                 (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…