Patna High Court
Amresh Kumar @ Amulkul @ AnukulversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The bail application of the petitioner was denied.
Summary
Amresh Kumar was arrested in connection with a case registered under Section 309(6) of the Bihar Non‑Compulsory Statutes and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging that he and co‑accused forcibly entered an informant's house, assaulted the informant's nephew and shot the housemaid. The petitioner’s name surfaced in the confessional statement of co‑accused Lala Rai, though no weapon was recovered from him. While three other co‑accused had previously been granted bail, the court noted that the bail of another co‑accused, Ajit Kumar Yadav, had been denied. The State opposed bail on the grounds of the petitioner’s identification in the parade and the confessional statement implicating him. The High Court, finding the petitioner’s case distinct from the earlier bail grants and considering the seriousness of the allegations, rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial within three months, allowing a fresh bail petition thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being identified in the identification parade and implicated in a co‑accused's confessional statement.
- Whether the earlier bail grants to other co‑accused are determinative for the petitioner's bail application.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- bail
- identification parade
- confessional statement
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- trial expeditious
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78036 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Amresh Kumar @ Amulkul @ Anukul S/O Ranjeet Singh R/O Village-
Daudnagar, P.S- Bidupur, Distt.- Vaishali, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Prabhat, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Prem Kumar Jha, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
6 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case no.183 of
2025 registered under section 309(6) of BNS and Section 27 of
Arms Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that all accused persons
forcibly entered the house of the informant and had assaulted
informant’s nephew with butt of pistol and fired upon the house
maid causing severe injury to her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
F.I.R was lodged against unknown and subsequently the name
of accused persons have transpired during course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78036 of 2025(6) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
investigation and the name of the petitioner has featured in the
confessional statement of co-accused Lala Rai, who is the
brother-in-law of the informant and is also said to be the main
conspirator and he has longstanding enmity with the informant’s
family. No incriminating article has been recovered from his
possession. Further, three other co-accused persons have already
been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
orders dated 14.10.2025, 11.11.2025 and 12.12.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. Nos.50860 of 2025, 76071 of 2025 and 86811 of 2025
respectively and the case of the petitioner also stands on similar
footing and he is in custody since 26.07.2025 and undertakes to
cooperate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State on the ground that petitioner has been
identified in T.I parade and moreover confessional statement of
co-accused also suggests that it was the petitioner who had
opened fire on the maid of the informant causing grievous
injuries to her. Further, bail application of co-accused Ajit
Kumar Yadav has been rejected vide order dated16.01.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 53017 of 2025 with a direction to
expedite the trial.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78036 of 2025(6) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
circumstances of the case and also considering that case of the
petitioner is not similar to the co-accused who have been
granted bail by this Court by aforementioned orders and further
considering that the prayer for bail of co-accused Ajit Kumar
has been rejected and also considering the allegations against
the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner and the application is rejected.
7. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the
trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of three
months, failing which liberty is granted to the petitioner to
renew his prayer for bail in the Court concerned, as such liberty
has been granted by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the
case of Ajit Kumar.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…