Patna High Court
Vishal Kumar @ Ajay RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
Bail was denied as there was no fresh ground to reconsider the earlier refusal.
Summary
Vishal Kumar, accused of offences under Sections 326, 307, 120B and 302 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for an alleged contract killing, applied for bail. He contended that he was falsely implicated and that only co‑accused confessional statements linked him to the crime, with no other material evidence. The petitioner, who has 22 prior criminal cases and has been in custody since September 2023, had earlier been denied bail by the Apex Court in SLP(Crl.) No.9375 of 2024. The State opposed bail, noting that the trial involves 13 accused, the prosecution has finished its case and defence witnesses are being examined, with the trial expected to conclude within two months. The Court found no fresh ground to revisit the bail issue and consequently rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the seriousness of the offences, his criminal antecedents, and the stage of trial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 307, 326
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- Arms Act
- contract killing
- criminal antecedents
- trial stage
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4313 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-632 Year-2023 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
Vishal Kumar @ Ajay Ray, Son of Mohan Ray, aged about 38 years,
Resident of Bal Kishun Complex, Near Central Bank, Rajeev Nagar, P.S.-
Rajeev Nagar, District- Patna Presently resident at Mohalla - Kurji Balu Par,
PS- Digha, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Bharti, Advocate
Mr. Raghav Kumar, Advoate
Mr. Akash Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
Mr. Ratnakar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND
MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
4 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 326, 307, 120B and 302
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, it is case of contract
killing and the petitioner along with other co-accused persons
came on motorcycles and shot the brother of the informant,
thereafter he died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4313 of 2026(4) dt.18-03-2026
2/2
submits that save and except, the confessional statement of co-
accused persons, there is no other material on recorded to show
the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence.
Petitioner has got twenty two criminal antecedents as stated in
para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 16.09.2023. He
next submits that earlier the prayer for bail of this petitioner was
rejected by the Apex Court in SLP(Crl.)No.9375 of 2024.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the Status report of learned trial
Court dated 07.03.2026, it appears that there are total 13
accused persons facing trial and prosecution has concluded its
argument and the defence witnesses are going on and the trial is
likely to be concluded within two months, if both sides co-
operate, so there is no no fresh ground to reconsider the prayer
for bail of this petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is
hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Brajesh Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…