Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar KushwahaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The High Court held that there was no violation of the bail conditions and therefore rejected the application for cancellation of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Kushwaha, filed a bail cancellation application seeking to set aside the bail granted on 18-10-2022 to Birendra Yadav in a case under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner alleged that the accused had suppressed material facts, including the existence of three pending criminal cases, and therefore the bail should be cancelled. The Supreme Court had earlier granted the petitioner liberty to approach the High Court for cancellation of the bail. The High Court examined whether any of the conditions imposed at the time of bail were breached. Upon inquiry, the court found no violation of the bail conditions and noted that the alleged suppression did not constitute a breach. Consequently, the application for cancellation of bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the conditions of bail imposed on the accused were violated
- Whether alleged suppression of facts in the bail application justifies cancellation of bail
- Whether the High Court can cancel bail based on the Supreme Court's liberty to entertain the application
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- cancellation of bail
- breach of conditions
- suppression of facts
- IPC
- Section 302
- Section 201
- Section 34
- Supreme Court liberty
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74441 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-239 Year-2021 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Vijay Kumar Kushwaha Son of Late Jitendra Bhagat R/O Village- Rupan
Chhap, P.S.- Barauli, Distt.- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Birendra Yadav @ Virendra Yadav (M) aged about _ years, S/o Ram Ashish
Chaudhary @ Ramshi Chaudhary, R/o Village Rupan Chhap , P.S. Barauli,
District Gopalganj
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Kamala Kant Tiwary, Advocate
Mr. Bhuneshwar Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Lal Babu Keshari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an
inadvertent spelling mistake has occurred in paragraph No. 1 of
the bail petition. As such, he seeks permission to correct the
same in the course of the day.
3. Permission, as prayed for, is granted.
4. The present bail application has been filed for
cancellation of bail order dated 18.10.2022 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 34801 of 2022 in connection Barauli P.S. Case No. 239 of
2021 under Sections 302, 201 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
pending before the Court of A.D.J.-XII, Gopalganj.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74441 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for
cancellation of bail, the petitioner has moved before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India by filing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No(s). 10051 of 2023, wherein vide order dated 11.11.2024,
liberty was granted to the petitioner to apply before the High
Court for cancellation of the bail granted to the second
respondent. He further submits that Opposite Party No. 2 has
made suppression in the arguments and by virtue of such
suppression, obtained bail from this Hon’ble Court. He further
submits that there were three criminal cases pending against
Opposite Party No. 2, whereas he has narrated only two cases.
He therefore submits that the bail be cancelled.
6. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 submits
that it is true that the petitioner has moved before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India. Before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India, the petitioner contended that the conditions of bail were
breached, and for this reason, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India granted liberty to the petitioner to move before the High
Court for cancellation of the bail granted to Opposite Party No.
2. He further submits that three conditions were imposed upon
Opposite Party No. 2 at the time of granting bail. He further
submits that even after furnishing the bail bond, Opposite Party
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74441 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
No. 2 has not violated any of the conditions mentioned in the
order dated 18.10.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34801 of 2022.
7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer
for bail and submits that from the materials on record it
transpires that breach of the conditions of the bail order has not
been made.
8. Upon a specific query put by this Court to the
learned counsel for the petitioner as to which condition of bail
has been violated, he submits in response that it is not a breach
of any condition, rather suppression has been made in the
submissions.
9. In light of the observations made by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India and upon the submissions made, it
transpires that there is no violation of the conditions on which
bail was granted. This Court refrains itself from passing any
order.
10. Accordingly, the present application for
cancellation of bail stands rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…