Patna High Court
Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the presence of a direct allegation of firing, corroborated by post‑mortem findings and witness testimony, precludes the grant of bail.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar was arrested on 7 May 2025 in connection with a case alleging that he fired at a victim, resulting in death, under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He applied for bail, claiming he was falsely implicated and that the FIR was fabricated. The State opposed the bail, citing the FIR’s specific allegation of firing, corroborative witness statements recorded in the case diary, and a post‑mortem report supporting the prosecution. The court examined the direct allegation, the medical evidence, and the number of supporting witnesses. Concluding that the evidence prima facie established the charge, the court refused the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the FIR contains a direct allegation of firing and is supported by medical and witness evidence.
- Whether the claim that the FIR is false and fabricated negates the necessity for bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- murder
- evidence
- post‑mortem
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81173 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar S/o Ram Narayan Ray @ Raj Kumar Ray R/o Village-
Kharidabad, PS- Muffasil, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Sneha Shruti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-01-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad, learned Senior counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
07.05.2025, in connection with Samastipur Nagar P.S. Case No.
70 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 07.03.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has
fired upon the victim due to which he died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81173 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not
committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on
the basis of material available on record and case diary,
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is
direct and specific allegation of firing attributed against the
petitioner and apart from aforesaid, the witnesses have also
supported the case of the prosecution which was recorded in
paragraph-13 of the case diary as well as apart from aforesaid
the postmortem report also support the case of the prosecution.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that there is direct
and specific allegation of firing supported by the medical
evidence as well as a number of witness have also supported the
case of the prosecution, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Samastipur Nagar P.S.
Case No. 70 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81173 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
Checking your session…