Patna High Court
Sujit Kumar Dubey @ Gobind Kumar Dubey @ Sujit Dubey @ Gobind KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sujit Kumar Dubey, was charged with murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly shooting dead the informant’s brother. He has been in custody since 29 January 2022 and has previously had two bail applications rejected by the same court. The petitioner argued that the trial delay of over four years was not his fault and that he was ready to cooperate for an expeditious trial. The State and the informant opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the post‑mortem report supporting the FIR. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the prior rejection of bail on merits, and the lack of justification for further liberty, the court denied bail but directed the trial court to expedite the trial and allowed a fresh bail application if the trial is not concluded within nine months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of murder and an Arms Act offence after a prolonged pre‑trial detention.
- Whether the delay in trial justifies granting bail despite prior bail rejections.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- Arms Act 27
- trial delay
- high court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88402 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2022 Thana- BIKRAM District- Patna
======================================================
Sujit Kumar Dubey @ Gobind Kumar Dubey @ Sujit Dubey @ Gobind
Kumar S/o Sudhir Kumar Dubey R/o Village - Padariyawa, P.S - Bikram,
District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Lalan Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 06-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Vikram
P.S. Case No. 32 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable
under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner allegedly
shot dead the informant’s brother.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been in custody since 29.01.2022. It is further
submitted that the prayer for bail of the present petitioner has
already been rejected on two occasions by this Court, vide Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88402 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
Misc. No. 44762 of 2022 dated 01.02.2023 and Cr. Misc. No.
73917 of 2023, with a direction to expedite the trial. Learned
counsel further submits that one case under the Arms Act has
been registered subsequently, after institution of the present
case. It is also contended that the petitioner has remained in
custody for more than four years and one month and that the
trial has not yet been concluded, and the delay is not attributable
to the petitioner.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the prayer for bail
and submit that there is a specific allegation of firing against the
petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s earlier bail
applications have been rejected on merits and that the post-
mortem report supports the allegations made in the F.I.R.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State and the informant submit that they are
ready to cooperate for expeditious disposal of the trial.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the arguments advanced on behalf of both sides, and the
fact that the petitioner’s bail prayer has already been rejected on
merits twice, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88402 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
8. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the
trial and conclude the same as early as possible. In the event the
trial is not concluded preferably within a period of nine months
from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be at liberty to
renew his prayer for bail.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
Nilmani/-
U T
Checking your session…