Patna High Court
Ajay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The court held that given the petitioner’s non‑inclusion in the FIR, lack of eyewitness evidence, and four‑month pre‑trial custody, bail must be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Kumar, applied for regular bail in a murder case registered under sections 103(1), 238(b) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was part of a group that murdered the informant's son, based largely on statements of a co‑accused and a post‑mortem report, though the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, has no criminal record, and has been in custody for four months since 17‑Oct‑2025. The State opposed bail, citing the informant’s diary entry that named the petitioner and the seriousness of the injuries shown in the post‑mortem. The court, noting the lack of eyewitness evidence, the petitioner’s non‑inclusion in the FIR, the prolonged pre‑trial detention and the filing of the charge sheet, ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the petitioner is not named in the FIR but is alleged to be involved in the offence.
- Whether the absence of eyewitness testimony and the length of pre‑trial detention justify the grant of bail.
- Whether the statements of co‑accused and post‑mortem findings affect the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238(b), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- pre‑trial detention
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87695 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2025 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia
======================================================
Ajay Kumar S/o Domi Mukhiya R/o Village - Haldibari Ward no. 1, P.S -
Barhara Kothi, District - Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 24-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Barhara Kothi P.S. Case
no.225 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1), 238(b) and
3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that a mobile phone of Md. Sarfaraz having been found with the
informant's son, Md. Sarfaraz had threatened to kill him. On the
date of occurrence, on the informent’s son not returning home, a
search started. On Inquiry from Md. Sarfaraz he disclosed the
names of the other six accused persons who had committed the
murder and hidden the dead body of the informant's son. The
dead body was recovered, as disclosed by Md. Sarfaraz.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87695 of 2025(4) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
petitioner is not named in the FIR. He was falsely implicated in
the case in course of investigation. There is no eyewitness to the
alleged occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since
17.10.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted in the case. He
has no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned
counsel for the informant submits that even before the statement
of co-accused Md. Sarfaraz, the informant in paragraph no.4 of
the case diary itself has taken the name of the petitioner of him
being present along with the other accused persons. It is further
submitted that the postmortem report shows multiple injury on
the body of the deceased.
6. Having heard learned at counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material
that has transpired against the petitioner in course of
investigation, there being no eyewitness to the alleged
occurrence, the petitioner having remained in custody for 4
months since 17.10.2025 and charge sheet having been
submitted in the case, the Court directs the petitioner to be
enlarged on bail in connection with Barhara Kothi P.S. Case no. 225
of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87695 of 2025(4) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash
U T
Checking your session…