Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prince KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court held that bail could not be granted as no new ground was shown, and dismissed the application.

Summary

The petitioner, Prince Kumar, was arrested in February 2024 in connection with a murder case (PS Case No. 120 of 2024) alleging he and others killed the son of an informant by cutting his neck, charged under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He applied for regular bail, which was previously rejected on 12 February 2025. In the present application, the petitioner’s counsel could not demonstrate any new ground for bail, and the court noted the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s continued custody. The court therefore dismissed the bail application, directing the trial judge to frame charges and proceed without delay, while allowing a future bail application if the prosecution causes delay. The decision upholds the trial’s progression while keeping bail options open under specific circumstances.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail for offences under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the IPC.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • murder
  • conspiracy
  • high court
  • regular bail
  • trial proceedings

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75372 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Prince Kumar S/o Sadhu Mishra Resident of Village- Akbarpur, P.S.-
                 Naubatpur, District- Patna, Bihar

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Vandana Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Renu Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-02-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant

                   of regular bail in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 120

                   of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201/34 of

                   the Indian Penal Code. Earlier the bail application of the

                   petitioner was rejected vide order dated 12.02.2025 passed in

                   Cr. Misc. No. 70608 of 2024 which reads as under:-

                                                Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
                                   and learned APP for the State.
                                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
                                   with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 120 of 2024
                                   registered for the offence under Sections 302,
                                   201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
                                                3. As per the prosecution case, the
                                   petitioner and others are said to have killed the son
                                   of the informant by cutting his neck.
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75372 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                                      2/2




                                                 4. The petitioner is in custody since
                                    23.02.2024 and the driver is a witness to the
                                    detention of the son of the informant by the
                                    accused persons.
                                                 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, this
                                    Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
                                                 6.    Accordingly,      this   application   is
                                    dismissed.
                                 3. Though, the learned counsel for the petitioner has

                    argued this case vehemently but he has been unable to point out

                    any new ground for grant of bail.

                                 4. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

                                 5. The trial Judge, is directed to frame the charge and

                    proceed with the trial so that the trial of the petitioner is not

                    delayed.

                                 6. It is made clear that if the trial of the petitioner is

                    delayed by the prosecution then the petitioner may renew his

                    prayer for bail.



                                                             (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U


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.