Patna High Court
Byas Singh @ Vyas Singh @ Veyas Singh @ Beyas SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail and the bail application is allowed.
Summary
The petitioner, Byas Singh, father of accused Nitesh Kumar, applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 109, 303(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, where the FIR named only Nitesh Kumar and Sonu Kumar. The prosecution alleged that Nitesh Kumar fired at the deceased, Umender Singh, with the petitioner allegedly present and in possession of the deceased's mobile. The petitioner argued that he is not named in the FIR, has no criminal antecedents, and is merely the father of the accused. The informant and the State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner instigated the offence and was present at the scene. After considering the submissions, the court ordered the petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a person not named in the FIR but alleged to have instigated or been present at the scene can be denied bail.
- Whether the alleged possession of the deceased's mobile and presence at the occurrence justify refusal of bail.
- Whether bail is permissible under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act in the circumstances of the case.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 303(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- FIR
- co-accused
- father of accused
- instigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4663 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2025 Thana- DARAUNDA District- Siwan
======================================================
Byas Singh @ Vyas Singh @ Veyas Singh @ Beyas Singh, aged about 56
years, Male, S/o Let Majistar Singh, R/o Village- Bhikhabandh, P.S-
Daraunda, District- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Naresh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel
for the informant, who has appeared suo motu.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Daraunda PS Case No.471 of 2025 dated 28.09.2025, instituted
for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 303(2), 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms
Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged
date of occurrence co-accused, Sonu Kumar, came at the house
of the informant and told that co-accused, Nitesh Kumar, who
is the son of the petitioner, was calling him and accordingly, son
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4663 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
of the informant, Umender Singh, accompanied him. Later on,
at about 7.30 PM, the informant got information from the
villagers that his son, Umender Singh, has sustained firearm
injury near Bhikhaban Canal upon which the villagers and the
sons of Umender Singh, namely, Rohit Kumar Singh and Mohit
Kumar Singh rushed to the place of occurrence and found
Umender Singh having firearm injury on his person. On being
enquired, he told that Nitesh Kumar has fired the shot at him
while co-accused Sonu Kumar had caught him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in the FIR. The FIR has been lodged
against two accused persons, namely, Nitesh Kumar and Sonu
Kumar. There is specific allegation against co-accused, Nitesh
Kumar, that he fired on the deceased due to which he died. The
petitioner happens to be the father of co-accused, Nitesh Kumar.
There is complicity of Nitesh Kumar and Sonu Kumar in the
alleged crime. In the entire FIR, there is no whisper against the
petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 26.10.2025 having
no criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP as well as learned counsel for the
informant has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for
the informant has submitted that the petitioner is the father of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4663 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
the main assailant and on his instance, Nitesh Kumar, fired on
the deceased due to which he died. Further submission is that
the mobile of the deceased was recovered from the possession
of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner was
also present at the place of occurrence and on his instigation, the
occurrence took place.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the ACJM-VI, Siwan, in Daraunda PS
Case No.471 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
J. Alam/-
U T
Checking your session…