Patna High Court
Ritik KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The bail application was rejected.
Summary
Ritik Kumar was arrested in connection with the murder of Shubham Kumar, alleged under sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Act. The prosecution alleged a love‑triangle motive, with Amit Kumar and Khushi Kumari as primary conspirators, and claimed the petitioner participated in the assault and disposal of the body. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he only abetted the crime and was not involved in the assault, contending that bail should be granted. The court noted that the trial was nearing its conclusion, with most witnesses examined and only the doctor and investigating officer remaining, and observed the petitioner had been in custody for a long period. Despite these considerations, the bail application was rejected, and the court directed the trial court to complete the trial within six months and to ensure the investigating officer’s appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offence and prolonged custody
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged role as an abettor justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. Act — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- abetment
- trial delay
- B.N.S. Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4230 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-434 Year-2024 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
======================================================
Ritik Kumar S/o Kailash Paswan R/o Village - Sarari, P.S - Jamui, District –
Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
For the informant : Mr. Narsingh Tanti, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 03-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with
Jamui P.S. Case No. 434 of 2024 for the offence punishable
under sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Act lodged on
12.07.2024 by the informant, Gautam Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, both Shubham Kumar
(deceased) and Khushi Kumari used to attend the same coaching
institute at Jamui. On 10.07.2024, the mobile of Shubham
Kumar was switched of and their common friend, Sweta Kumari
made a call to the deceased’s father informing that he was in a
relationship with Khushi Kumari and Shubham Kumar may be
killed. The deceased father and uncle started searching for
Shubham Kumar which finally was found in a Sarari pond. This
led to the FIR.
4. The investigation took place in the matter and the
suspects including the petitioner were picked up which led to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4230 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
the disclosure of entire story that Khushi Kumari was in
relationship with Amit Kumar, Shubham Kumar was also
having one sided love/attraction with her. She was not interested
in him, informed Amit Kumar. Thereafter, they conspired and
the mobile data of that period clearly shows that this petitioner
amongst other was in constant touch with Khushi Kumari. The
dead body that was recovered, showed the sign of brutal assault
by the accused persons which led to the killing of the Shubham
Kumar. Not content with it, if the confessional statement of the
petitioner is to be believed, Amit Kumar continued beating with
the belt to the deceased despite the fact that he was dead.
Subsequently, this petitioner alongwith others threw the body in
the pond from where the recovery took place.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
main role is assigned to Amit Kumar, Khushi Kumari being
conspirator, even going by the confessional statement, he at best
abetted the said occurrence. The role of assault is not on him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that one of the
accused, Nitish Kumar has been granted bail in Cr. Misc. No.
88899 of 2024.
6. In this case, Trial Court Report was called for and
as per the letter no. 46 dated 24.02.2026 all the witnesses have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4230 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
been examined but only Doctor and the I.O. are/were to be
examined.
7. Learned counsel for the informant, Mr. Narsingh
Tanti submits that with the passage of time, even the Medical
Officer has been examined and only the I.O. is to be examined.
8. Considering the fact that the trial is at its fag end,
the petitioner’s role is already there, as recorded above, it would
be appropriate that he faces trial.
9. The bail application stands rejected.
10. However, since the petitioner is in custody since
long, the Trial Court is directed to ensure that the trial is
concluded in next six months and if the I.O. is not appearing to
take all the steps to ensure his presence including issuance of
bailable/non-bailable warrant.
11. The S.P., Jamui is also directed to ensure that the
I.O. of the present case appears and depose before the Trial
Court.
12. Let a copy of the order be sent to the S.P., Jamui
for his perusal and needful.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…