Patna High Court
Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was denied because the petitioner is the main assailant and the trial has already commenced.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Kumar, sought regular bail for offences under Sections 302, 341, 323 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to the alleged murder and assault of Kanta Prasad during a land‑dispute. The trial court had earlier rejected his bail application but allowed a renewal after six months if the trial was not concluded. The prosecution presented a post‑mortem report indicating fatal chest trauma and argued that the petitioner was the principal assailant, while the defence claimed innocence, lack of weapon, and no prior criminal record. The State cited a recent Supreme Court observation that bail is ordinarily not entertained in serious offences once trial has commenced. Considering that the trial was underway, the petitioner was identified as the main assailant, and the evidence indicated his involvement, the High Court dismissed the bail application and directed a calendar trial to be completed within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in a serious offence like murder when the trial has already commenced.
- Whether the petitioner, being the alleged main assailant, is entitled to bail despite the prosecution’s evidence and post‑mortem findings.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s observation in SLPCr. No.13378/2024 regarding bail in serious offences is applicable to the present case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 323, 34, 341, 504
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- trial commencement
- main assailant
- calendar trial
- post‑mortem
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72100 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2021 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Santosh Kumar S/o Kasturi Sharma Resident of Village - Bishunpura Bajar,
P.S - Sidhwaliya, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Sidhwalia P.S. Case No. 134 of 2021 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 302, 341, 323 and 504/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that earlier the bail petition of this petitioner was rejected by this
Court vide order dated 21.03.2025 with a liberty to renew his
prayer for bail after six months, if the trial is not concluded.
4. A report has been received from the learned trial
court which goes to show that only one witness has been
examined from the side of the prosecution but it is admitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72100 of 2025(5) dt.09-01-2026
2/4
position that up till now, two witnesses have been examined.
5. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.04.2021, at
about 07:00 PM, son of the informant namely, Kanta Prasad and
one Raju Kumar saw that some persons were cutting the wheat
crop in his field, then, Kanta Prasad arrived there and saw that
the petitioner along with others have covered their face were
cutting the wheat crop from the fields of informant, the
informant namely, Kanta Prasad protested, this petitioner
ordered to harvest the crop and if anybody will obstruct he will
be removed. It is further alleged that all the persons have
attacked on Kanta Prasad, knocked him down and the petitioner
sat on his chest and all the accused persons started assaulting
him by fists and slaps. It is further alleged that the petitioner
caught his neck.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that in this case, there is no weapon of assault and
that there was land dispute between the parties and there is
allegation against several persons of assaulting the witness and
the deceased with slaps and fists. It has also been submitted that
a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72100 of 2025(5) dt.09-01-2026
3/4
petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in
judicial custody since 01.09.2024.
7. As against this, the learned counsel for the
informant and learned APP for the State have vehemently
opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and has
stated that from perusal of the post-mortem report, it will
transpire that the force rib of the deceased was fractured and as
far as the cause of death is concerned, it has been opined by the
board that due to trauma on chest which leads to
cardiopulmonary failure.
8. The learned counsel for the informant has further
submitted that other accused persons who were having
allegation of assaulting the deceased with slaps and fists, has
already been granted bail. The petitioner is the main assailant
and the post mortem report establishes his indulgence in the
occurrence. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also
submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in a case in
Special Leave Petition (Cr. No. 13378 of 2024), specifically in
Paragraph No. ‘14’ has observed as follows:
“14. Ordinarily in serious offences
like rape, murder, dacoiti, etc, once
the trial commences and the
prosecution starts examining the
witnesses, the Court be it the Trial
Court or the High Court should loath
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72100 of 2025(5) dt.09-01-2026
4/4
in entertaining the bail application of
the accused.”
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since
petitioner is the main assailant and trial has commenced, this
Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. However,
the learned trial court is directed to conduct calendar trial of this
case and to conclude the same within three months.
10. Before parting, it is made clear that a calendar trial
means the dates are fixed in advance for the case, and
information is given to all the parties regarding the fixed dates,
and the I.O. is given direction to produce witnesses on each date
one by one.
11. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.