Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of a bond and compliance with stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, was arrested on 16 February 2025 in connection with a murder case (Sessions Trial No. 576 of 2025) under Sections 103 and 238 of the BNS, 2023. The FIR, filed by the victim's wife, alleged that the petitioner killed her husband and concealed the body, but the informant was not an eye‑witness and no material evidence beyond suspicion was presented during investigation. The petitioner’s counsel highlighted his clean antecedent and the lack of substantive proof, while the State opposed bail, relying solely on the suspicion recorded in the FIR. The Court examined the principles of bail, noting that mere suspicion without corroborative evidence does not justify continued detention. Consequently, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offence and the absence of material evidence beyond suspicion.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • suspicion
  • clean antecedent
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Section 103 BNS 2023
  • Section 238 BNS 2023
  • Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82959 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar S/O Dinesh Choudhary Resident of village- Lahari Uday Nagar,
                 P.S.- Srinagar District- Purnea

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   31-01-2026                    Heard Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   16.02.2025 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 576 of 2025

                   arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 90 of 2025, F.I.R. dated

                   15.02.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections

                   103, 238 of BNS,2023 but the cognizance has been taken under

                   Sections 103(1) and 238(a) of BNS, 2023.

                                3. As per FIR, the informant alleged that her husband

                   has been killed by use of rod and bricks and she has firm belief

                   that the petitioner has killed her husband and hidden the dead

                   body in bush.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82959 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
                                            2/3




          submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from

          the FIR that the informant has raised suspicion against the

          petitioner in the FIR and except the suspicion no other material

          has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest

          the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. The

          informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence. The

          police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the

          petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 16.02.2025.

                         5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the

          petitioner is named accused in the FIR but fairly submits that

          except the suspicion no other material has come during

          investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of

          the petitioner in the present occurrence.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean

          antecedent and nothing has come during investigation against

          the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the

          present occurrence, let the petitioner, above named, be released

          on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Purnea in connection

          with Sessions Trial No. 576 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82959 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
                                                           3/3




                         Case No. 90 of 2025, with the following conditions:-

                                      (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                         properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

                         and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

                         on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                         reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                      (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                         witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (III) And, further condition that the court below shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                         any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                         criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                         cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                         acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                         shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                         verification.



                                                (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U          T


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.