Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vicky KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

Vicky Kumar applied for bail in a case involving murder and illegal arms charges under Sections 103 and 238 of the B.N.S, 2023 and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR did not name him; his alleged involvement emerged only from confessional statements of co‑accused and the recovery of a stolen tempo and other items from his house. The State and the informant opposed bail, arguing the material recovered and co‑accused testimonies indicated his participation. The Court found the evidence sufficient to deny bail, noting the seriousness of the offences, and ordered the trial court to expedite the trial within one year. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given that the only evidence against him consists of co‑accused confessional statements and recovered stolen property.
  • Whether the nature of the offences under the B.N.S and Arms Act warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • arms act
  • confessional statements
  • recovery of stolen property
  • trial expedite

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66771 of 2025

                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2025 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Vicky Kumar S/o Virendra Mahto @ Virendra Kumar @ Bilendra Mahto
                 Resident of Math Laxmanpur, Koiri Tola, P.S.- Alamganj, District- Patna

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :       Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri, APP
                 For the Informant       :       Mr. Adarsh Gaurav, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   12-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P

                   for the State and learned counsel for the informant

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 103 and 238 of the B.N.S,

                   2023 and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, informant’s son was shot

                   dead by some unknown for which FIR was registered against

                   unknown.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence.

                   Petitioner is not named in the FIR. During course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66771 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026
                                            2/3




          investigation, name of this petitioner has surfaced in this case

          only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused

          persons and save and except the same, there is no other material

          on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in the alleged

          offence. Moreover, charge-sheet has already been submitted and

          petitioner, having no criminal antecedents, is in custody since

          24.05.2025.

                       5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned

          counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer

          for bail of the petitioner and submitted that during course of

          investigation, stolen tempo of the deceased, along with other

          stolen articles, were recovered from the house of this petitioner.

          It is further submitted that other co-accused persons have also

          named this petitioner as one of the assailant of the deceased.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, nature of accusation and materials surfaced during course

          of investigation, the prayer for grant bail of to the petitioner is

          rejected.

                       7. However, considering the fact that petitioner is in

          custody since 24.05.2025, the learned trial court is directed to

          expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within a
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66771 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy

                       of this order.



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

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.