Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Bablu Kumar @ Mukesh @ Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Bablu Kumar, was arrested on 17-07-2023 for alleged offences under IPC sections 468, 471, 401, 414, 34 and Arms Act sections 25(1‑B)A, 26 and 35, involving a stolen motorcycle, a false number plate, an illegal pistol and cartridges. He applied for bail, claiming prolonged custody, while the prosecution argued that most witnesses had been examined, only two official witnesses remained, and a petition under Cr.P.C. 311 had been filed, indicating the trial was nearing conclusion. The State highlighted the petitioner’s ten prior criminal convictions. The court considered the seriousness of the charges, the pending trial, and the petitioner’s criminal history. Concluding that the circumstances did not warrant release, the judge rejected the bail application.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offences, the stage of trial, and his prior criminal record.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Arms Act
  • prior convictions
  • trial pending

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56543 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2023 Thana- Rampur Chauram District- Arwal
                 ======================================================
                 Bablu Kumar @ Mukesh @ Mukesh Kumar son of Late Surendra Sharma
                 Village- Kandap, Ps- Gaurichak, Dist- Patna

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Nityanand Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
                 PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   13-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Rampur Chauram P.S. Case No. 69 of 2023 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections-468, 471, 401, 414, 34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code and Sections-25(1-B)A/26/35 of the Arms

                   Act.

                                3. As per allegation, on the tip off, the informant

                   having constituted a team, started to check the vehicles and in

                   that course, a motorcycle was intercepted on which, three

                   persons were seated. It came to light that the miscreants are

                   running the motorcycle by changing the number plate. The

                   petitioner is said to have been arrested with stolen motorcycle
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56543 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      and illegal pistol as well as the cartridge.

                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

                      that the petitioner is in custody since 17-07-2023, to which, the

                      learned APP Mr. Shailendra Kumar replied that the entire

                      prosecution witnesses have been examined and now, only two

                      official witnesses are left to be examined. It has further been

                      submitted that a petition under the provision of 311 of Cr.P.C.

                      has been filed by the prosecution and that is why, the trial has

                      not been concluded. It has also been submitted that the

                      petitioner has 10 criminal antecedents in his credit.

                                   5. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

                                   6. It appears that the trial is at the verge of conclusion.

                                   7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                      presently I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and

                      accordingly, the same is rejected.



                                           (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
A.K.V.//-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.