Patna High Court
SUNNY KUMAR @ SANNY KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail, finding sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunny Kumar, was named in an FIR for offences under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC relating to a death that occurred on 13-12-2023. He contended that the incident was an accident caused by a bus rear wheel and sought anticipatory bail, asserting a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, relying on a video statement recorded by the deceased in an ambulance in which the deceased identified the petitioner and co‑accused as his assailants. The petitioner argued that the video was neither collected nor forensic‑examined by the police. After considering the video statement and the seriousness of the allegations, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a murder case where the deceased's video statement implicates the petitioner.
- Whether the alleged lack of forensic examination of the video statement affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 304, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- accidental death
- video evidence
- IPC
- CrPC
- Section 302
- Section 34
- Section 304
- Section 164
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52388 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2023 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sunny Kumar @ Sanny Kumar Son Of Pramod Rai Resident Of Village -
Mathiya Bariyarpur, P.S. - Piprakothi, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kr. Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
10 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Piprakothi P.S.
Case No. 281 of 2023 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 302, 34 of IPC.
3. As per FIR, the son of the informant
accompanied petitioner and other co-accused person on
13.12.2023 and somewhere between 11-12 P.M. a call
was made to informant by injured/ deceased that he was
badly assaulted and thrown, whereafter informant came
to the place of occurrence, in meantime police also
arrived there, whereafter the son of the informant was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52388 of 2024(10) dt.03-02-2026
2/4
taken to Muzaffarpur hospital but on the way he scummed
to the injury, which he received during the occurrence.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner that the occurrence is primarily
accident where out of certain altercations with the
conductor of the bus the petitioner received injury from
the rear wheel of the bus, but was given a color of murder
case implicating innocent petitioner in the background of
admitted land dispute as it can be gathered from the face
of FIR itself. It is submitted that one of the co-passenger
of the bus while recording his statement under section
164 of the Cr.P.C. said that the occurrence was nothing
but an accident. It is submitted that in view of aforesaid
the petitioner deserves anticipatory bail. It is submitted
that petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Arguing further, it is submitted that cause of
death of petitioner is shock and hemorrhage caused by
heavy hard and blunt substance which also prima-facie
suggest that the occurrence was accidental in nature and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52388 of 2024(10) dt.03-02-2026
3/4
considering all such aspect police after investigation
submitted charge sheet under section 304 of IPC qua
apprehended co-accused persons.
6. Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel
for the informant while opposing the prayer of bail drawn
attention of this Court towards para no. 190 of the case
diary where during supervision it surfaced that the video
statement of deceased was recorded by informant on
mobile while he was in ambulance, and on way of
Muzaffarpur hospital where she asked injured/ deceased
specifically that who assaulted him, whereafter deceased
categorically replied that this petitioner alongwith co-
accused Dhiraj Kumar assaulted him badly and soon after
said recording he died.
7. Taking contrary to the aforesaid submission,
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
aforesaid video was never collected during the course of
investigation or if collected was not sent for forensic
examination.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52388 of 2024(10) dt.03-02-2026
4/4
8. Let it be so, taking note of aforesaid para of
the case diary which primarily suggest that deceased
through recorded video categorically named this
petitioner and other co-accused to assault him soon
before his death, accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail
of above-named petitioner stands rejected.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
U T
Checking your session…