Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Anil KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the petitioners were named in the FIR and there was direct evidence of murder.

Summary

The petitioners applied for anticipatory bail in two criminal miscellaneous applications arising from Police Station Kako case No. 290 of 2024, which alleged that they participated in the murder of the informant's son. The FIR charged offences under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and a post‑mortem report showed a bullet injury to the deceased's head. The petitioners argued they were falsely implicated and that the death was an accident resulting from a love‑relationship dispute. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the direct allegation in the FIR and forensic evidence of homicide. The Court, noting the seriousness of the charge, the presence of direct evidence, and the gravity of the punishment, declined to grant anticipatory bail and dismissed the applications.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is named in the FIR and there is direct forensic evidence of murder
  • Whether the seriousness of the offence and severity of punishment preclude the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • murder
  • FIR
  • bullet injury
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • high court
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90549 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Anil Kumar S/O Late Shyam Babu Yadav Resident Of Village- Bharthua, P.s.-
                 Kako, Bhelawar O.P., Dist.- Jehanabad

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                                                         with
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 5280 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
           1.     Raj Kumar @ Raj Kumar Yadav Son of Vinod Yadav Resident of Village -
                  Bharthua, P.S. - Kako, Bhelwar O.P., Dist. - Jehanabad.
           2.    Shankar Dayal @ Shankar Dayal Yadav Son of Vinod Yadav Resident Of
                 Village - Bharthua, P.S. - Kako, Bhelwar O.P., Dist. - Jehanabad.
           3.    Sunil Kumar Son of Late Shyambabu Yadav Resident Of Village - Bharthua,
                 P.S. - Kako, Bhelwar O.P., Dist. - Jehanabad.
           4.    Madhir Kumar S/o Late Jagjeevan Yadav R/o Village- Ghorhar (Ghorghat)
                 Salarpur, P.S- Kako, Dist- Jehanabad.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 90549 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satya Nand Shukla
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 5280 of 2026)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   29-04-2026        1.   Both these applications arise out of Kako (Bhelwar)

                           Police Station Case No. 290 of 2024, with the consent of

                           the parties, both these applications are heard together.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90549 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
                                            2/4




              2.   Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, in both the

                   cases.

              3.   These applications, for grant of anticipatory bail, arise out

                   of Kako (Bhelwar) Police Station Case No. 290 of 2024,

                   dated 14.10.2024, disclosing offences punishable under

                   Sections 103(1)/238/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,

                   2023.

              4.   The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report,

                   is that on 10.12.2024, at about 10 PM, the co-accused and

                   co-villagers of the informant, namely, Bhupendra Kumar

                   and Madan Kumar came to the house of the informant

                   and took the informant’s son, who knows the work of

                   electrician, with them. When the informant’s son did not

                   come back after a long time, the informant called him on

                   his mobile, but his mobile could not be connected. Then,

                   the informant went in search of his son, but he could not

                   be traced, co-accused Bhupendra Kumar and Madan

                   Kumar were also not present in their house. It has further

                   been alleged that the petitioners, along with others, killed

                   the informant’s son by shooting him and threw his dead

                   body on the railway track.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90549 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
                                            3/4




              5.   Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated

                   in this false case. He further submits that the informant

                   has implicated these petitioners merely on suspicion

                   merely because they are the relatives of Bhupendra

                   Kumar and Madan Kumar. There is no eye-witness to the

                   present occurrence. He further submits that the fact of the

                   matter is that there was love relationship between the son

                   of the informant (deceased) and co-villager Anisha

                   Kumari, who is the daughter of the neighbour of the

                   informant, Vijay Prasad and in the night, the deceased

                   came to meet her when the ladies members saw them and

                   the deceased jumped from the roof and fled away. He

                   further submits that the deceased met with a railway

                   accident and died.

              6.   On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

                   vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and

                   submits that the petitioner is named in the First

                   Information Report itself and the doctor has found bullet

                   injury in the head of the deceased and to give it a case of

                   accident, the accused persons have kept the dead body of

                   the deceased on a railway track.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90549 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
                                                        4/4




                          7.   Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf

                               of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that

                               the petitioners are named in the First Information Report,

                               there is direct allegation against the petitioners that they

                               killed the deceased, from the post mortem report, it is

                               evident that bullet injury has been found in the head of

                               the deceased, the gravity of the offence and severity of the

                               punishment thereof, I am not inclined to grant the

                               petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.

                          8.   These applications are, accordingly, dismissed



                                                                           (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
Prabhakar Anand/-

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.