Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sanjay Kumar @ Bablu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The High Court held that bail could not be granted and directed the trial court to expedite the trial and complete it within six months.

Summary

The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, is in custody for alleged murder and attempt to cause grievous hurt under IPC sections 302 and 326, based on a FIR filed by his father‑in‑law. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner stabbed the deceased, his brother‑in‑law, as shown in CCTV footage. The petitioner applied for bail, which was previously rejected on 30‑10‑2024. The High Court, after hearing, ordered the trial court to expedite the examination of remaining witnesses and to take necessary steps if officials fail to appear, and directed that the trial be concluded within six months. Consequently, the bail application was again rejected.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case involving alleged murder and attempt to cause grievous hurt under sections 302 and 326 IPC
  • Whether the trial court has complied with procedural requirements for witness examination and timely disposal of the trial

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • attempt to cause grievous hurt
  • IPC 302
  • IPC 326
  • trial delay
  • CCTV evidence

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70094 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1878 Year-2023 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Sanjay Kumar @ Bablu Kumar S/o Late Kameshwar Prasad @ Kameshwar
                 Shah Resident of Village-Girihinda Dhala, P.S- Sheikhpura, Dist- Sheikhpura.
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Prem Ranjan Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State            :      Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-01-2026                          Heard the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with

                   Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 1878 of 2023 for the offence

                   punishable under sections 326 and 302 of the Indian Penal

                   Code, lodged on 08.12.2023 by the informant, Vasudev Prasad.

                                 3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that his son had gone to the K.L.S. College, Nawada for filling

                   his B.A. Part-II examination form and as he was returning, near

                   Deepak Furniture Shop after spraying chilly power on his face,

                   he was stabbed. The son died immediately which led to the

                   F.I.R. against unknown.

                                 4. The allegation of killing of his own brother-in-law

                   against the petitioner, the father-in-law is the informant and the

                   CCTV footage has shown him as the person who stabbed the

                   deceased. In that background, on 30.10.2024, the bail

                   application was rejected vide Cr. Misc. No. 43632 of 2024. This
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70094 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      is the second attempt.

                                   5. A report was called for from the learned Trial

                      Court, according to which, out of seven witnesses, five have

                      been examined and summons have been issued to the Medical

                      Officer and the Investigation Officer appear before the Trial

                      Court.

                                   6. It is expected from the learned Trial Court that the

                      rest witnesses who are government officials are examined if still

                      not examined and if they fail to appear, necessary steps be taken

                      which include the bailable/non-bailable warrant and the

                      Superintendent of the Police of the district be also apprised

                      regarding their non-appearance before the Trial Court.

                                   7. This Court would further expects the learned Trial

                      Court to take the matter to its logical conclusion/to conclude the

                      trial in next six months.

                                   8. The bail application is rejected with the aforesaid

                      observation.



                                                     (Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.