Patna High Court
Vishal Kumar @ JiganversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
Vishal Kumar sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under IPC sections 307 and 34 and Arms Act section 27 for allegedly firing at an informant's house, causing an empty cartridge to fall inside. The prosecution alleged that Kumar and co‑accused fired six rounds at the door, and two empty cartridges were recovered. The petitioner argued he was innocent, had no incriminating material in his possession, was not identified in CCTV footage, and had no criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offence. The High Court, considering the gravity of the charges and the evidence presented, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks and apply for regular bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged attempt to murder and illegal possession of arms.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 307
- IPC 34
- Arms Act 27
- attempt to murder
- firearms
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6350 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1416 Year-2023 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Vishal Kumar @ Jigan S/o Sanjeet Prasad @ Sanjit Ray R/o Village-
Janakdhari Lal Road, P.S- Danapur, Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Danapur P.S.
Case No. 1416 of 2023, registered under Section 307/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, the petitioner
along with other co-accused persons fired on the door of the
house of the informant due to which the empty cartridge fell
inside the house of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the present
case. No incriminating material have been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6350 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
2/2
that there is general and omnibus allegation against the
petitioner. During investigation the petitioner was not identified
in the CCTV footage. The petitioner has got no criminal
antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further submitted
that accused persons including the petitioner made six round of
firing at the door of the informant and two part of empty
cartridges were recovered. Hence, considering the allegation,
the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the seriousness of allegation, this Court is not inclined to
grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. However, the petitioner is
directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four
weeks and pray for regular bail. If such an application is filed,
the same shall be disposed by the Court below without being
prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…