Patna High Court
Sunil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The bail application was dismissed, and regular bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, was arrested in connection with a shooting incident in which the son of an informant was killed. He is charged under Sections 309(4) and 103 of the B.N.S. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner’s name surfaced during the investigation, particularly from a self‑inculpatory statement of a witness, Vikash Kumar, whose motorcycle was used in the crime. The petitioner, who has been in custody since 23 September 2025 and claims a clean antecedent, applied for regular bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence, and Justice Sandeep Kumar dismissed the bail application, noting that the observations are prima facie and not determinative of the trial's merits.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner given the seriousness of the offences under Sections 309(4) and 103 of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- B.N.S.
- serious offence
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33145 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2024 Thana- NEORA District- Patna
======================================================
Sunil Kumar Son of Satrudhan Yadav @ Satrudhan Rai R/O Bindeshwari
Patliputra Polytechnic, Opposite Sai Mandir, P.S.- Patliputra, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravish Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Neora P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024 registered for the offence
under Sections 309(4) and 103 of the B.N.S. read with Section
27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, some unknown
criminals had shot the son of the informant. The motorcycle
number of the criminals was given to the informant by the local
people. The name of the petitioner has come during
investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence.
The name of the petitioner has come in self-inculpatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33145 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
2/2
statement of one Vikash Kumar @ Maddy from whom, the
motorcycle used in the crime has been recovered. The petitioner
is in custody since 23.09.2025 having clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the seriousness of the case, I am not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
8. 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)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.