Patna High Court
Ashok SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Ashok Sharma was charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including murder, for allegedly assaulting the father of an informant with a kulhari, resulting in death. The petitioner sought regular bail after an earlier bail application was rejected, arguing that only four of ten witnesses had been examined and that the key witness, the deceased's wife, gave contradictory statements. He also highlighted a delay between the incident, FIR filing, and case registration, and noted his lack of prior criminal record while being in custody since May 2024. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the informant's support for the prosecution. Considering the incomplete witness testimony, inconsistencies, delay, and the petitioner's clean antecedents, the court decided to grant regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with serious offences including murder
- Whether the delay in FIR registration and incomplete examination of witnesses affect the bail eligibility
- Whether the contradictory testimony of the key witness undermines the prosecution's case
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 341, 448, 504, 506
Subjects
- regular bail
- IPC sections
- murder
- trial delay
- witness testimony
- sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80001 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2024 Thana- KUNAULI District- Supaul
======================================================
Ashok Sharma S/o- Late Sukhdeo Sharma Resident of Village- Haripur, PS-
Kunauli District- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148,
149, 448, 341, 323, 307, 302, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code which was earlier rejected vide order dated 07.04.2025
with an observation that the petitioner may be at liberty to
renew his prayer for bail after six months, if the trial is not
concluded.
3. Stage of trial has been called for from the learned
trial court and from perusal of the report, it transpires that out
of ten witnesses, only four witnesses have been examined.
4. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80001 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026
2/4
assaulted with kulhari on the head of the father of the
informant due to which he died.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that only victim has been examined in this case. It has also
been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that during
trial, Veena Devi the wife of the deceased has been examined
as P.W.-2 and in examination-in-chief, she has stated that the
petitioner has assaulted with kulhari on his head due to which
he fell down and died. In her cross-examination, she has stated
that her husband was not there at the time of measurement.
When all persons have returned after the measurement. After
one and half hour, her husband has gone to see the land. He
has gone there alone. When this witness reached there, her
husband (deceased) was lying there and blood was oozing
from his head only. She went there and tied his injury with
saree and raised alarm. On alarm being raised, after 10-15
minutes, other villagers arrived there. In para-4, she has stated
that at the time of occurrence, no male member was at the
house. When the dead body of the deceased was received at
her house from Patna, male members arrived. After this, she
disclosed about the occurrence to them. After having
discussions between them, the informant filed this case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80001 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026
3/4
Learned counsel has further submitted that from perusal of the
FIR, it is clear that the occurrence is of 21.04.2024 and
fardebyan was recorded on 25.04.2024 whereas the case was
registered on 28.04.2024. He has further submitted that this
delay has not been examined by the prosecution. A statement
has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has
got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in
judicial custody since 11.05.2024.
6. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
of regular bail and has submitted that the informant has
supported the case of the prosecution in his deposition and in
examination-in-chief and cross-examination as well.
7. It is clear from the above discussions that P.W.-2
the wife of the deceased is the person who has seen the
occurrence first of all and according to her version, she has
not seen the occurrence.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the above facts and circumstances of this case, this
court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above
named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in
connection with Kunauli P.S. Case No. 50 of 2024 on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80001 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026
4/4
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
A.D.J.-IV, Supaul.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…