Patna High Court
Guddu Kumar @ Gudda KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted to the petitioners subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Guddu Kumar and Sumit Kumar were arrested in connection with a FIR alleging that they, along with others, indiscriminately fired on an informant’s family, resulting in the informant’s son’s death. They were charged under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1) and 109 of the Bihar Non‑Specific (BNS) Act, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioners argued that they have no prior criminal record and that the FIR contains only a generic allegation against all accused, with no specific charge of firing against them. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court noted that co‑accused Bechan Yadav and Anil Yadav had previously been granted bail and, considering the petitioners’ clean antecedent and lack of specific incriminating allegation, ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail despite being charged with serious offences including murder and illegal possession of arms.
- Whether a generic allegation in the FIR against all accused suffices to deny bail to the petitioners.
- Whether the grant of bail to co‑accused influences the bail decision for the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Non‑Specific (BNS) Act, 2023 — s. 103(1), 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- arms act
- murder
- general allegation
- antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33931 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger
======================================================
1. Guddu Kumar @ Gudda Kumar S/o Prakash Yadav R/o Village -
Shankerpur, Milki Tola, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Munger
2. Sumit Kumar S/o Prakash Yadav R/o Village - Shankerpur, Milki Tola, P.S.-
Muffasil, District - Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since
25.02.2026 in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 79 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 15.03.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1) and 109 of the BNS, 2023
and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, all the accused
persons including these petitioners indiscriminately fired upon
the informant and his family members due to which the
informant's son got shot in his chest resulting into his death.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33931 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that
although the petitioners are named in the FIR but there is no
specific allegation of firing against them rather there is general
and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including
these petitioners and for the same set of allegations, the co-
accused, namely, Bechan Yadav @ Bechan Prasad Yadav has
been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 17580 of 2026 and another co-accused,
namely, Anil Yadav has also been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 27.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 82209 of 2025.
He further submits that the police after investigation submitted
the charge sheet against the petitioners. The petitioners are in
custody since 25.02.2026.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned CJM, Munger in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33931 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
79 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.