Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Guddu Kumar Sharma @ Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Sharma @ Guddu MishtriversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Regular bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Guddu Kumar Sharma, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 414, 420, 467, 468 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to alleged cheating, forgery and participation in a common intention offence. Four stolen trucks were recovered from the petitioner’s garage, indicating his involvement in dealing with stolen vehicles. The petitioner has been in custody since 12‑12‑2025. The court, after hearing counsel, considered the seriousness of the offences and the material evidence recovered. It concluded that granting regular bail would be inappropriate at this stage. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, with a direction that the petitioner may re‑apply if the trial is delayed by the prosecution. The observations were limited to the bail application and not to the merits of the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the recovery of stolen trucks and the nature of offences under IPC Sections 414, 420, 467, 468 and 34.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • IPC
  • cheating
  • forgery
  • common intention
  • stolen vehicles
  • bail application

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27589 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2024 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Guddu Kumar Sharma @ Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Sharma @ Guddu Mishtri
                 S/o Yogendra Sharma Resident of Village - Ward no. 6, Near Shiv Mandir,
                 Daudnagar, P.S- Bidupur, District -Vaishali

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
                                                  Mr. Satyendra Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-04-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Bidupur P.S. Case No. 21 of 2024 registered for the offence

                   under Sections 414, 420, 467, 468 & 34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code.

                                3. Four stolen trucks have been recovered from the

                   garage of the petitioner who is in custody since 12.12.2025. The

                   petitioner is named in the FIR. Stolen trucks were recovered

                   from his place of work, which indicates his involvement in

                   dealing with stolen vehicles.

                                4. Considering the recovery of four stolen trucks from

                   the garage of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27589 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      regular bail to the petitioner.

                                   5. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands

                      rejected. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner

                      may renew his prayer for bail.

                                   6. 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

                      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       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.