Patna High Court
Kunal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The application for regular bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Kunal Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case involving alleged murder (IPC Section 302) and criminal conspiracy (IPC Sections 120B and 34). The allegation is that he, along with three others, abducted the son of an informant, who was later found dead with smothering and strangulation marks. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating that no one witnessed the incident and his name appeared only on suspicion. The State argued that the FIR names the petitioner and that forensic findings link the deceased to the accused. Considering the seriousness of the charges and the evidence presented, the Court refused to grant bail and directed the trial court to expedite the trial, noting the petitioner has been in custody for about a year.
Issues considered
- The court must decide whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of murder and criminal conspiracy when the FIR names the accused and forensic evidence suggests involvement.
- Whether mere suspicion and lack of eyewitness testimony are sufficient grounds to grant bail in a serious offence like murder.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- IPC
- regular bail
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54237 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2024 Thana- Jaitpur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Kunal Kumar S/O Shiv Mahto @ Shiv Jee Mahto R/O Village- Ram Krishna
Dubiyahi, P.S- Jaitpur, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 13-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf
of the petitioner for the offences alleged under Sections 302 and
120B/34 of the of the Indian Penal Code, registered in
connection with Jaitpur P.S.Case No. 48 of 2024/S.T.No.
149/2025.
3. As per allegation, the son of the informant was
taken by the petitioner along with other accused persons. Till
late evening, he did not return.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated.
None has seen the occurrence and the name of the petitioner
has figured only on the basis of suspicion.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54237 of 2025(5) dt.13-01-2026
2/2
5. On the other hand, the learned APP Mr. Shailendra
Kumar has submitted that all the four persons, who took the son
of the informant, have been named in the FIR. Smothering and
strangulation mark was found on the dead-body.
6. The petitioner is named in the FIR. He along with
other co-accused persons called the deceased and took him.
Later on, his dead-body was recovered.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances,
and in view of the allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant
the petitioner the privilege of bail, which is hereby rejected.
8. Since the petitioner is in custody for near about a
year, the learned trial court is directed to take every endeavour
to expedite the trial.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
HR/-
U T
Checking your session…