Patna High Court
Vikash Kumar @ Vikash PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, directing release on a bond with conditions.
Summary
Vikash Kumar petitioned for bail in a case registered under Section 109(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 25(5) and 27 of the Arms Act, where the FIR was initially lodged against an unknown assailant for the shooting death of Shubham Kumar. The petitioner was not named in the FIR; later statements by two witnesses implicated him, but no direct or circumstantial evidence was produced and no witnesses were presented at trial. The prosecution opposed bail, arguing the later statements. The court noted the lack of tangible material, the FIR’s original designation of the offender as unknown, and the absence of any witness testimony, and therefore ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of physical presence in court and cancellation on non‑appearance. The trial court was directed to proceed expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the FIR names the offender as unknown and the prosecution lacks direct or circumstantial evidence.
- Whether post‑incident witness statements implicating the petitioner are sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the commencement of trial affects the grant of bail and what conditions may be imposed.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(5), 27
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 109(1)
Subjects
- bail
- FIR against unknown
- Arms Act
- Narcotic Substances Act
- evidentiary insufficiency
- trial procedure
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51319 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-800 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Paswan S/o- Shyam Lal Paswan Village- Badi Bazar
Mohania ward no- 12 PS-Mohania District- Kaimur at Bhabua
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parwej Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
6 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 109 (1) of the B.N.S and Sections
25 (5) and 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, informant’s brother was
shot dead by some unknown person.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and the same
has been lodged against unknown indicating that the brother of the
informant, Shubham Kumar, had been shot at, while he was attending
the marriage at the house of Gauri Paswan by some unknown persons
hitting him on his waist and left hand and the F.I.R also indicates that
even after trying to find out about the assailant, nothing could be
found out, and thus, the written report was being submitted a day
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51319 of 2025(6) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
after the occurrence i.e. on 03.12.2024. It is further submitted that
there is neither any direct evidence nor any circumstantial evidence
available against the petitioner but for the fact that after four days of
the occurrence one Sridhar Paswan all of a sudden gave a statement
before the police stating that he was also present in the marriage and
he had seen that it was the petitioner who had shot at the deceased,
Shubham Kumar, whereafter he had fled away. However, witness
Gauri Paswan whose daughter’s marriage was taking place has not
indicated any name of the assailant. Subsequently, one Love Paswan
also gave his statement stating that he had seen the petitioner with a
pistol and in the stampede which was created after firing and people
were saying that it was the petitioner who had fired shot. It is, thus,
submitted on behalf of the petitioner that if this was the situation it
does not stand to reason as to why the name of the petitioner did not
feature in the First Information Report itself. It is further submitted
that petitioner is in custody since 17.04.2025 and charges have been
framed on 29.07.2025 and till date prosecution has not produced any
witness.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the bail petition.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of
the case and also considering the fact that there is no tangible
material collected against the petitioner during the course of
investigation coupled with the fact that the F.I.R was lodged against
unknown and his name has transpired only subsequently on account
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51319 of 2025(6) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
of some vague material, the above named petitioner is directed to be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Mohania P.S. Case No.
800 of 2024.
7. However, since the trial has begun, the learned trial
court is directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously, without
giving any unnecessary adjournments.
8. Further, the petitioner shall remain physically present in
court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure
on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds
shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.