Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prashant Kumar @ Prasant KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Bail was denied because the trial was on the verge of completion and the application was filed after an inordinate delay.

Summary

The petitioner, Prashant Kumar, was arrested in September 2022 in connection with a murder case (STR No.05 of 2023) under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that unknown assailants shot the victim, leading to her death, and that the petitioner fled the scene, after which the murder weapon was recovered. The petitioner applied for bail, arguing that all witnesses had been examined and the trial was nearing completion. The court noted that the bail application was filed three years after the impugned order of 2022, indicating a substantial delay. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the stage of the trial, and the delay, the court declined to grant bail and dismissed the application, also directing that similar delayed bail applications not be entertained.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act when the trial is near completion
  • Whether the delay of three years in filing the bail application warrants dismissal

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Section 27 Arms Act
  • delay in bail application
  • trial completion

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87714 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2022 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Prashant Kumar @ Prasant Kumar S/o Shri Umesh Sharma R/o Village-
                 Agarpur Berbanta, P.S.- Lalganj, District- Vaishali at Hajipur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Niranjan Parihar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   24-03-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with STR

                   No. 05 of 2023 arising out of Lalganj P.S. Case No. 187 of 2022

                   registered for the offence under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, unknown criminals are

                   said to have shot at the victim and because of the same she died.

                                4. The petitioner is in custody since 8.9.2022.

                                5. During investigation, it has come that the petitioner

                   was found running from the place of occurrence and upon the

                   instance of the petitioner, the murder weapon was recovered.

                                6. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly

                   submits that in the trial, all the witnesses have been examined.

                                7. In view of the fact that the trial is on the verge of
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87714 of 2025(5) dt.24-03-2026
                                                      2/2




                    completion, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the

                    petitioner.

                                  8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

                                  9. During the course of arguments, it has come to the

                    notice of this Court that the impugned order is of the year 2022

                    and after a delay of almost three years, the petitioner has

                    approached this Court for grant of bail annexing the impugned

                    order of 2022.

                                  10. In view of the above, the office is directed not to

                    entertain the filing of the bail applications which are based on

                    such impugned orders.



                                                             (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U


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.