Patna High Court
Ritesh @ Vinit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court modified Para‑4 of the order dated 25‑02‑2026 to reflect the FIR allegations.
Summary
The petitioner, Ritesh @ Vinit Kumar, challenged the factual description in Para‑4 of the trial court's order dated 25‑02‑2026, which incorrectly stated that he entered his house and shot his husband. The petitioner argued that the FIR records indicate the incident occurred in the informant's field, not his house. The State's counsel reiterated that the FIR alleges the petitioner fired at the deceased, causing fatal injuries. Relying on the petitioner's counsel submission, the High Court modified Para‑4 to align with the FIR description. The order was thus corrected to reflect that the petitioner came to the informant's field and shot the deceased, resulting in death.
Issues considered
- Whether the factual description in Para‑4 of the order dated 25‑02‑2026 should be corrected to match the FIR allegations
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR
- homicide
- order correction
- facts amendment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58533 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-687 Year-2022 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna
======================================================
Ritesh @ Vinit Kumar S/o- Late Santosh Sharma @ Late Santosh Kumar
R/V- Dahibhatta PS- Masaurhi Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 03-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
inadvertently at Para-4 in the order dated 25.02.2026, it has
been recorded that this petitioner entered her house and fired at
her husband causing injury on head and thereafter fired three
rounds on his chest leading to his instant death. It is not alleged
in the FIR that petitioner entered her house and fired at her
husband rather it is alleged that the occurrence took place at the
field of the informant.
3. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the order dated
25.02.2026 at Para-4 is modified to read as above.
4. At this stage, the learned A.P.P. submits that from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58533 of 2025(4) dt.03-04-2026
2/2
perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant who is wife of the deceased alleges that
the petitioner came at her field and fired at her husband causing
injury on head and thereafter fired three rounds on his chest
leading to his instant death. The learned A.P.P. further submits
that petitioner is the main assailant.
5. The Para-4 of the order dated 25.02.2026 is
modified to the extent as indicated above.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.