Patna High Court
SHALU KUMAR @ SHOLU KUMAR @ SALUversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner with specific conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Shalu Kumar, was in custody for a murder case (Case No. 132 of 2021) involving offences under IPC sections 302, 34, 120(B) and Arms Act section 27, based on an FIR lodged by informant Prabha Kumar. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and four others shot the informant's son, but the post‑mortem showed only two entry wounds, raising doubts about the omnibus charge against all five accused. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the earlier bail granted to co‑accused Aman Kumar in a related matter should guide the decision and offering conditions to prevent witness intimidation. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent under the Excise Act. The High Court, after considering the custody period, the earlier bail order, and the petitioner’s assurances, granted bail with stringent conditions, directing regular appearances before the trial court and police, and prohibiting any tampering with witnesses or evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case under IPC sections 302, 34, 120(B) and Arms Act 27 despite the seriousness of the offence.
- Whether the earlier bail granted to a co‑accused (Aman Kumar) influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
- Whether the risk of witness intimidation or tampering warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- witness tampering
- pre‑trial detention
- coordinate bench
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59234 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2021 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
SHALU KUMAR @ SHOLU KUMAR @ SALU Son of Vinod Sah @ Vinod
Sah @ Binod Singh R/O Vill.- Gangapur, P.S.- Tajpur (O.P.- Vaini), District -
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
7 01-05-2026 Heard Mr. N. K. Agarwal, learned senior counsel for
petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar, learned counsel for the
informant as also Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with
Tajpur P.S. Case No. 132 of 2021 for the offence registered
under Sections 302, 34, and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code
and section 27 of the Arms Act lodged on 27.03.2021 by the
informant, Prabha Kumar @ Prabha Devi.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation in the
FIR is that upon hearing the bullet sound the informant went
down stairs and found her son in a pool of blood with bullet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59234 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
2/5
hitting his head and body. The named accused, petitioner
included escaped in two motorcycles. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that omnibus allegation of firing is against all the accused
persons, the postmortem report records two entry wounds in the
body whereas there are five named accused. Further, one Aman
Kumar was extended relief in Cr. Misc. No. 9146 of 2022
(Aman Kumar Vs. State of Bihar) by a coordinate Bench
(Annexure- 3) to the petition. He has remain in custody since
30.03.2024 and further undertakes that if granted relief is/are:-
i. shall leave the district and will
come to the place only on the date of trial.
ii. he is ready to move with the
police from the place of residence in the
different district in the place of trial and
back to the residence. If there is any
apprehension from him, might down the
informant/witnesses.
iii. if it comes to the knowledge of
the trial court/police that at any point of
time he has threatened the
informant/witness, the Court shall take
immediate steps for cancellation of bail
bonds.
5. Learned counsel representing the informant submits
that the informant is a lady and is a retired government servant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59234 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
3/5
He further submits that six witnesses out of eight witnesses have
been examined and Aman Kumar is now an absconder and due
to the informant/witnesses always being threatened, a proper
report has already been submitted both before the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur as also the learned trial
court.
6. Learned counsel for the State also opposes the
prayer submitting that though under Excise Act, he has criminal
antecedent.
7. Having gone through the submission put forth by
learned senior counsel for the petitioner and also taking into the
account the custody period of the petitioner and though Aman
Kumar is an absconder he was granted relief by a coordinate
Bench earlier, as recorded above, in that background, this Court
is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J.-1,
Samastipur, in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 132 of
2021, subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member
/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59234 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
4/5
(Aadhaar Card/Voter ID Card/Pan Card/Driving License) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of her bail
bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the
concerned Police Station every month for six months to mark
his attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate
shall be submitted before the trial court failing which steps shall
be taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
9. It is made clear that failure on the part of the
petitioner to abide by any of the undertaking and/or he continues
to leave in the said district, the trial court /Police shall take
immediate steps to ensure that the bail granted to him stands
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59234 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
5/5
cancelled.
10. Since the case of Aman Kumar already stands
bifurcated, the trial court is also requested to ensure that the trial
is concluded at the earliest.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…