Patna High Court

Manish Kumar @ Tiwari yadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

Bail was denied as the allegations were serious and the trial was already underway.

Summary

Manish Kumar, arrested on 19 January 2023, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 307, 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed the FIR was fabricated, while the informant asserted a direct allegation that the petitioner fired at the victim, resulting in death. The trial court had already framed charges and examined a witness, indicating that the trial was underway. The High Court, noting the seriousness of the offences and the specific allegations in the FIR, declined to grant bail. The court also directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted in a case involving murder, attempt to murder, conspiracy and a firearms offence where the trial is in progress.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34

Subjects

bail
murder
attempt to murder
conspiracy
Arms Act
high court
criminal procedure
trial expeditement

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45433 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2022 Thana- NARAINPUR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Manish Kumar @ Tiwari yadav Son of Janardan Singh @ Janardhan Yadav
                 Ro village -Ekauna, PS -Agiaon, (Gadahni), Dist- Bhojpur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mrs. Akanksha Malviya, Advocate
                 For the State            :       Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

9   16-03-2026                   Heard Mr. Akanksha Malviya, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner, Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned APP for the State and

                   Mr. Ravindra Kumar, learned counsel for the informant.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   19.01.2023, in connection with Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 61 of

                   2022, F.I.R. dated 13.06.2022 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code

                   and section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order

                   dated 22.08.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68669 of 2023.

                                 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                   submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45433 of 2025(9) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

          alleged in the FIR and the petitioner is in custody since

          19.01.2023 and trial is not concluded as yet.

                       5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as

          learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the

          prayer for bail and submits that it appears from the FIR that

          injured person, namely, Rohit Kumar has lodged the FIR and he

          has stated that the petitioner has fired upon the victim which

          suggest that there is direct and specific allegation of firing is

          attributed against the petitioner and the doctor has declared the

          death of deceased, namely, Sonu Yadav.

                       6. Vide order dated 13.02.2026, a report was called for

          with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial

          Court dated 24.02.2026 reveals that the charge has been framed

          against the petitioner and trial has began and one witness has

          already been examined by the learned Trial court.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid fact and nature of

          allegation that there is direct and specific allegation against the

          petitioner in the FIR that he has fired upon the deceased well as

          report of the learned Trial Court that the trial is going on, I am

          not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with

          Narayanpur P.S. Case No. 61 of 2022, pending in the court of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45433 of 2025(9) dt.16-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Bhojpur at Ara.

                                   8. Prayer is refused.

                                   9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to

                      expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.


                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

Ranjeet/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…