Patna High Court
Rohan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohan Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34 and Arms Act sections 25(1‑b), 26 and 35 for allegedly extorting money and shooting the informant's son. He has been in custody since April 2022 and this was his third bail application. The trial is reportedly near its conclusion with fourteen witnesses already examined. The court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in X v. State of Rajasthan (2024), held that the seriousness of the offence and the advanced stage of trial preclude the grant of bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, with directions to the SSP to ensure any pending witnesses are produced and the petitioner may seek bail again if the prosecution causes further delay.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder‑related case when the trial is nearing conclusion
- Whether the prosecution’s delay in examining witnesses justifies bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b), 26, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- trial delay
- witness production
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50274 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna
======================================================
Rohan Kumar S/o Kanhaiya Prasad R/o Muhalla- Kachouri Gali, Dira Par,
P.S.- Chowk, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the third attempt on behalf of the petitioner
for grant of bail in connection with Chowk P.S.Case No. 173 of
2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
302,201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and25 (1-b) a 26/35 Arms
Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected vide order dated 26.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc.
No.55447 of 2024 which reads as under:-
Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Chowk P.S.Case No. 173 of
2022 registered for the offence punishable
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50274 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
under sections 302,201/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 25(1-b) a 26, 35 of
Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the
petitioner along with other accused persons
demanded extortion money from the
informant’s son and after denial, shot him
below his neck.
4. The petitioner is the assailant of
the deceased. He is in custody since
21.04.2022.
5. Considering the fact that the
petitioner is the assailant of the deceased, I
am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner
and therefore, the present bail application is
hereby rejected.
6. It has been submitted by Mr.
Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner that though charges has been
framed about one and half years back but no
witnesses is being examined in this case.
7. The prosecution cannot take the
liberty of not examining the witnesses when
the petitioner and other accused persons are
in jail.
8. In these circumstances, the
S.S.P., Patna is directed to see that the
witnesses are produced in the Court on the
date fixed if the charges have been framed. If
the charges have not been framed then the
learned trial court will frame the charges
and thereafter, the S.S.P., Patna will take
steps for producing the witnesses.
9. If the trial is delayed by the
prosecution, the petitioner may renew his
prayer for bail.
10. Let a copy of this order be
communicated to the S.S.P., Patna and
District Judge, Patna for its compliance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50274 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
through FAX or e-mail forthwith.
11. Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned APP
for the State will communicate this order to
the S.S.P., Patna.
4. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
trial has started and 14 witnesses have been examined.
5. Considering the fact that the trial is on the verge of
conclusion and 14 witnesses have been examined. The petitioner
does not deserve bail in view of the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of X Vs. State of Rajasthan
and Anr. Reported in 2024 SCC online SC 3539.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
N.K/-
U T
Checking your session…