Patna High Court
Ashish Raj @ Sudhir GopeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted and dismissed the application.
Summary
Ashish Raj @ Sudhir Gope was charged with murder under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and several provisions of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that he planned the killing, hired the gunman Munna and supplied the weapon. The petitioner sought bail for the second time, arguing that only four of seven witnesses had been examined. The court noted the seriousness of the offence, the petitioner’s alleged mastermind role, and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in X vs. State of Rajasthan (2024) to uphold its earlier order. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a murder case where the accused is alleged to have planned and hired the killer
- Whether the partial examination of witnesses (four out of seven) warrants bail
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent X vs. State of Rajasthan applies to deny bail in this case
- Whether the earlier denial of bail can be revisited on a second application
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- conspiracy
- arms act
- criminal procedure
- pre‑trial detention
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35849 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2024 Thana- BEN P.S. District- Nalanda
======================================================
Ashish Raj @ Sudhir Gope S/O Arvind Gope Resident of Village-Chhoti Ant,
P.S-Ben, Dist-Nalanda, PIN- 803114.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Prasad Gupta, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with Ben P.S. Case No. 142 of 2024 registered for
the offence under Sections 103(1), 61(2) & 3(5) of B.N.S. read
with Sections 27, 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 06.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 26373 of 2025 which
reads as follows:-
“Heard learned counsel for
the petitioner, learned counsel for
the informant and learned APP for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail
in connection with Ben P.S. Case
No. 142 of 2024 registered for the
offence under Sections 103(1),
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35849 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
61(2), 3(5) of the BNS and under
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution
case, the petitioner is accused in
the murder of the deceased. The
deceased was shot by one Munna
and after the killing, the petitioner
came on Motorcycle and took
away the accused Munna.
4. During investigation, it
has come that it is the petitioner
who had planned the murder and
he had hired Munna and gave him
the murder weapon and cartridge.
5. The petitioner is in jail
since 29.11.2024.
6. Learned senior counsel
for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has
not committed any offence.
7. Learned counsel for the
State and learned counsel for the
informant has opposed the
application of the petitioner and
has submitted that it is the
petitioner who has planned the
murder which has also come in the
self-inculpatory statement of co-
accused Munna.
8. Considering the
aforesaid facts, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
9. Accordingly, this
application is dismissed.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
the trial, four out of seven witnesses have been examined,
therefore, the petitioner may be granted bail.
5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35849 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of X vs.
State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, I am
not inclined to review my earlier order.
6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.