Patna High Court
Shivam VishwakarmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to bond and sureties, under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioner, Shivam Vishwakarma, was implicated in a murder case (PS Case No. 33 of 2024) for allegedly supplying a country‑made pistol and live cartridge to co‑accused Gulshan Yadav, who later confessed to the murder. The petitioner argued that the informant was not an eye‑witness and that the case rested on circumstantial evidence, further noting that the co‑accused were acquitted by the trial court for lack of evidence. The prosecution relied on Gulshan Yadav’s confession to assert the petitioner’s involvement in supplying illegal arms. The court observed that the petitioner was not present in the vehicle where the crime occurred, had a clean antecedent, and that the primary accused had been acquitted. Consequently, the court granted bail to the petitioner on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of supplying illegal arms in connection with a murder case.
- Whether the allegations based on circumstantial evidence and a co‑accused’s confession justify continued detention.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the acquittal of co‑accused warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- illegal arms
- circumstantial evidence
- confession
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- clean antecedent
- acquittal
- inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 56061 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Shivam Vishwakarma Son of Lalji Vishwakarma @ Laljee Vishvakarma R/o -
khartabpur, P.S.- Sarpataha, Dist- jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Md Fazle Karim, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in
connection with Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per FIR, a female dead body was found from a
wheat field by the informant who is a local chaukidar.
4. Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel, while
arguing for the petitioner submitted that the informant being local
chaukidar is not the eye-witness of the occurrence and, therefore,
the allegation completely raised upon circumstantial evidence. It is
submitted that in course of investigation one Gulshan Yadav was
arrested, who in his confession stated that this petitioner supplied
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 56061 of 2024(5) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
a country made pistol and live cartridge to him while he was in
vehicle alongwith Pawan Kumar deceased and Ramesh Yadav and
he subsequently with same country made pistol committed
murder. It is submitted that even confession be taken into
consideration, the maximum allegation against petitioner is of
supplying illegal arms to the main accused Gulshan Yadav. It is
pointed out by Mr. Agrawal that admittedly the petitioner was not
in vehicle, where crime in question took place.
5. Arguing further, Mr. Agrawal submitted that after
trial, apprehended co-accused persons, namely Pawan Kumar,
Gulshan Yadav and Ramesh Yadav were acquitted by learned trial
court in want of evidence. It is submitted that this petitioner is a
student of B. Pharma and sending him jail shall not serve any
purpose of justice and, moreover, investigation of this case on all
material aspects has already concluded qua other accused persons,
namely, Pawan Kumar, Gulshan Yadav and Ramesh Yadav.
6. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that as per confession this petitioner supplied country
made pistol and live cartridge to co-accused Gulshan Yadav, who
confessed to commit murder.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as maximum allegation which appears against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 56061 of 2024(5) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
petitioner to supply one country made pistol, where admittedly this
petitioner was not present in the vehicle, where occurrence took
place in terms of ever confession coupled with the fact that
petitioner is a man of clean antecedent, accordingly, above named
petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is
directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-XIV,
Gopalganj/concerned Court, where the case is pending in
connection with Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024 subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…