Patna High Court
Kamal Sharma @ Komal SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Kamal Sharma, was named in FIR No. 301 of 2025 for allegedly firing a pistol at an informant, causing injury, and for a subsequent shooting by a co-accused that resulted in the death of the informant's brother. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, claiming innocence and citing a land dispute with the informant, while acknowledging four other pending cases where he is out on bail. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the circumstances did not warrant it. However, the Court directed that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, the trial court should promptly decide his surrender‑cum‑bail application on merits.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences and the petitioner’s prior pending cases preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- attempt to murder
- murder
- land dispute
- pending criminal cases
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26941 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-301 Year-2025 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Kamal Sharma @ Komal Sharma Son of Harishanker Sharma Resident of
Village - Gharthwalia, Police Station - Panchrukhi, District - Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Panchrukhi P.S. Case No. 301 of 2025 lodged on
27.06.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) &
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the
Arms Act, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-IX, Siwan.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
four named accused persons including the present petitioner. It
has been alleged in the FIR that the petitioner has fired upon the
informant by pistol on his right hand due to which, he fell down
and sustained injury. When the informant’s brother came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26941 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
rescue, then accused Ankit Sharma fired from his revolver upon
the informant’s brother namely, Irshad Khan, due to which he
fell down and died on the spot. Subsequently all the accused
persons fled away by abusing the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
submits that the petitioner’s side and the informant’s side are
close neighbours and admitted land dispute is going on between
them. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation
against the accused persons. Counsel further submits that the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are
four cases pending against him and in all the cases, he is on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that as per the FIR, the
allegation against the petitioner is that he has fired upon the
informant, due to which, he fell down and sustained injury.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.
8. However, if petitioner surrenders before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26941 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
concerned Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today
then in that case, the Trial Court is directed to pass order on his
surrender-cum-bail application on the same day, without being
prejudice that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been
rejected by this Court and the Trial Court shall pass order on the
merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…