Patna High Court
Amar Kumar @ Amar BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court refused bail, holding that the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence presented warranted the petitioner’s continued custody.
Summary
Amar Kumar (Amar Bind) was arrested in connection with a murder case (Sections 302 read with 34 IPC) and an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising from an incident where he and co‑accused allegedly surrounded an informant's house, fired indiscriminately and assaulted the informant's son with an iron rod, leading to the son's death. The petitioner applied for bail, claiming innocence and that the trial had not progressed, while the prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the charge, the direction alleged against the petitioner, and his prior criminal antecedent. The trial court report indicated that eight of sixteen charge‑sheeted witnesses had been examined. The High Court, after considering the nature of the allegations and the evidence, declined to grant bail, finding the case sufficiently grave to warrant continued custody. Consequently, the petitioner's bail plea was refused.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case involving alleged direction and use of lethal weapons
- Whether the existence of a prior criminal antecedent and the stage of trial justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedent
- direction
- evidence
- trial stage
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72989 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2024 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Amar Kumar @ Amar Bind Son of Ashok Bind Resident of village - Shiv
Nandanpur, P.S.- Sultanganj, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda, Adv
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 18-04-2026 Heard Mr. N.K. Agarwal, learned senior counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
08.04.2024 in connection with Sultanjganj P.S. Case No.
68/2024 F.I.R. dated 17.02.2024 (S.T. Case No. 378/2025) for
the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner and
the co-accused persons holding lethal weapons are alleged to
have surrounded the house of the informant and started firing
indiscriminately and the co-accused Viswanath Bind exhorted to
kill, thereafter, Natuwa Bind and Randhir Bind caught hold of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72989 of 2025(6) dt.18-04-2026
2/3
the informant's son and the petitioner Amar Bind inflicted blow
of iron khanti on his stomach, causing injury. On being objected
by the informant, the co-accused Sawan Bind assaulted him
with an iron rod, causing injury and they fled away by firing in
the air. Further, the injured were taken to hospital where the
informant's son succumbed to the injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel has further submitted that the
petitioner is in custody since 08.04.2024. He has further
submitted that the trial is not in progress.
5. Vide order dated 19.03.2026 a report was called
with regard to the present stage of trial. Report of the learned
Trial Court dated 01.04.2026 reveals that out of sixteen charge
sheeted witnesses till date eight witnesses have been examined
and cross examined by the prosecution.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than
the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of
the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the said
matter. It is further submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72989 of 2025(6) dt.18-04-2026
3/3
appears that specific allegation is against the petitioner that he
has inflicted iron khanti on the stomach of the deceased and the
other co-accused persons have made firing in the air and later on
the the deceased has died which suggests that there is direction
allegation against the petitioner and the same was supported by
the number of prosecution witnesses during investigation.
7. Considering the nature of allegation and FIR
supported by the witnesses as per report of the learned Trial
Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
connection with Sultanjganj P.S. Case No. 68/2024 F.I.R. dated
17.02.2024 (S.T. Case No. 378/2025) pending in the court of
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Bhagalpur.
8. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…