Patna High Court
Dilkhush Kumar @ Dilkhush Singh @ Dilkhush Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilkhush Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 302, 120(B) and 34 and Arms Act sections 27, 25(1‑b)(a) and 26(1) for allegedly opening fire that caused the death of an informant's father. He contended that he was falsely implicated, citing an alibi supported by biometric attendance and CCTV showing his presence in Roorkee, and highlighted that all co‑accused had already been granted bail. The prosecution opposed bail, but the court noted the lack of specific evidence linking the petitioner to the firing and the credibility of the alibi. After evaluating the submissions and the doubtful prosecution case, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties. The application for bail was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with murder and related offences under the IPC and Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)(a), 26(1), 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- false implication
- alibi
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2293 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2020 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Dilkhush Kumar @ Dilkhush Singh @ Dilkhush Kumar Singh S/O Ranjeet
Singh @ Baudhu Singh Resident of village - Walipur, P.S- Pipariya, District-
Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhay Shankar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Lakhisarai P.S.
Case No. 167 of 2020 dated 11.03.2020, initially registered
under Sections 302 and 120(B)/34 of the IPC and Section 27 of
the Arms Act. Subsequently Sections 25(1-b)(a) and 26(1) of the
Arms Act were also added.
3.The prosecution case, in brief, is that the petitioner
has been named in the FIR as one of the three assailants who
opened fire, leading to death of the father of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that there is an allegation of
indiscriminate firing by the accused persons, including the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2293 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
2/4
petitioner, but no specific role is attributed to him. It is further
submitted that the co-accused persons, who were allegedly
waiting in a vehicle at the time of the occurrence, have already
been granted bail. During investigation, it has transpired that the
mobile tower locations of six persons, allegedly waiting to assist
the petitioner were far from the place of occurrence which casts
serious doubt on the prosecution case. Learned counsel next
submits that one of the FIR-named accused persons, namely Raj
Nandan (son of Dhillan Singh @ Braj Nandan Singh), who was
alleged to be one of the assailants, has been found to be present
at Roorkee at the relevant date and time where he had been
working as a Safety Officer since February, 2018 at A. India
Glass Solutions Limited, Manglore Shebrera Road, Roorkee.
The police has obtained his biometric attendance records and
CCTV footage corroborating his presence at Haridwar and
Roorkee during the relevant period, in support of his alibi. It is,
thus, submitted that three generations of a single family have
been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that co-accused Ranjeet Singh @ Baudhu Singh,
against whom there are similar allegations of being one of the
three assailants who allegedly resorted to firing leading to death
of the father of the informant, has been granted bail by a co-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2293 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
3/4
ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.11.2022 passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 31601 of 2022. It is also submitted that one of
the three assailants, namely Raj Nandan, has been found to be
falsely implicated and the police has submitted final form in his
favour. Further, co-accused Shiv Kumar Singh, who was alleged
to be present at the place of occurrence sitting in a Sumo vehicle
along with other named accused persons, has been granted the
privilege of bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 22.12.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33881 of 2020.
Similarly, co-accused Sachidanand Singh and Chandan Kumar
Singh, against whom the allegation was confined to their
presence in the Sumo vehicle along with others, have been
granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 22.03.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34286 of
2020. It is further submitted that other co-accused persons,
namely Rajesh Singh, Manish Kumar, Rahul Kumar and Surya
Kumar @ Sarpan Kumar, have also been granted bail by
different co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated
11.01.2021, 11.01.2021, 05.04.2021 and 12.08.2021 passed in
Cr. Misc. Nos. 24787 of 2020, 35275 of 2020, 41027 of 2020
and 15807 of 2021 respectively. Learned counsel further
submits that another named co-accused, namely Dhillan Singh
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2293 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
4/4
@ Brajnandan Singh, against whom motive was specifically
attributed, has also been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 02.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
54962 of 2021. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is in
judicial custody since 27.11.2025 and has no criminal
antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-II, Lakhisarai, in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case
No. 167 of 2020.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U T
Checking your session…