Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions stipulated under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.

Summary

Nitish Kumar was arrested in connection with a shooting incident and charged under Sections 309(6) and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that he was one of three miscreants who fired at an informant, causing a bullet injury. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, no incriminating material was recovered, and he has a clean antecedent, having been in custody since 07.03.2025. The State opposed bail, while the court considered the framing of charges, the period of custody, and the petitioner's clean record. The court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and requiring the petitioner’s presence in court.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused in offences under Sections 309(6) and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
  • Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the circumstances of the case justify bail despite the seriousness of the charges.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • false implication
  • Arms Act
  • criminal procedure
  • clean antecedent
  • conditions of bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68854 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar Son of Bijendra Rai, Resident of village -Maheswa, Ward No
                 10, PS- Madhepura, (Bharrai OP), Dist- Madhepura.
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   05-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                   2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in

                   connection with S.T. No. 164 of 2025, arising out of Madhepura

                   P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025 dated 19.01.2025, registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 309(6) and 109 of the

                   B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                   3. As per the prosecution case, while the informant

                   had been returning home after his job, three miscreants on one

                   motorcycle tried to stop him. The informant sped away his

                   motorcycle fearing danger. While fleeing away from the spot,

                   the other motorcycle borne criminals fired upon the informant,

                   who received a bullet injury.

                                   4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68854 of 2025(4) dt.05-01-2026
                                            2/3




          the present case. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from

          person or possession of this petitioner. There is general and

          omnibus allegation of firing against this petitioner. The

          prosecution story is not believable that informant identified the

          petitioner in the light of a vehicle. Learned counsel next submits

          that petitioner is having clean antecedent. Learned counsel lastly

          submits that petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2025 and

          charges have been framed in this case.

                          5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State

          opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.

                          6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

          submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the

          framing of charge and also considering petitioner’s period of

          custody and his clean antecedent, the petitioner, above-named,

          is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of

          the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and

          Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Madhepura / concerned Court, in

          connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, subject

          to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.

          and other following conditions:

                          (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68854 of 2025(4) dt.05-01-2026
                                                      3/3




                    petitioner.

                                    (ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and

                    every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned

                    trial Court.

                                    (iii) In case of non-appearance of the petitioner on

                    single date or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond

                    of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court

                    concerned.


                                                            (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Shahnawaz/-

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.