Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Bheema @ Bhuma Kumar @ Mithilesh Kumar @ BhomaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Bheema Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 34, 120B and Arms Act section 27, with Section 302 later added, for allegedly firing at the deceased. He applied for regular bail, claiming false implication, lack of eye‑witness testimony, and that no witness had yet been examined; he also asserted no prior criminal record and had been in custody since 24‑07‑2025. The State opposed the bail on the ground of the serious nature of the alleged offences. The Court, noting the allegation that the petitioner fired at the deceased and the seriousness of the charges, declined to grant bail, dismissing the application while directing the trial to be expedited and ordering the police to ensure witness appearance. The petitioner was permitted to renew the bail plea if the prosecution causes undue delay.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious charges of attempted murder, murder, and weapons offences.
  • Whether the absence of an eye‑witness and lack of trial evidence justify bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • IPC
  • Arms Act
  • murder
  • attempted murder
  • criminal conspiracy
  • trial expeditious
  • witness attendance

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9077 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-406 Year-2023 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Bheema @ Bhuma Kumar @ Mithilesh Kumar @ Bhoma S/O Vishan Singh
                 @ Vinesh Singh @ Vinesh Prasad R/O Village- Rampur, Garikhana, P.S.-
                 Khagaul, District- Patna at present resident of Neuraganj, P.S-Neura, District-
                 Patna.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyaya, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   16-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Khagaul P.S. Case No. 406/2023 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 34, 120B of I.P.C. and

                   Section 27 of Arms Act and subsequently Section 302 of IPC

                   was added.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner and other

                   accused persons are said to have fired upon the deceased.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. It is next

                   submitted that the informant is not an eye witness and he was

                   informed by the friends of the deceased that the petitioner and
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9077 of 2026(4) dt.16-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        other co-accused had fired upon the deceased. Learned further

                        submits that in the trial no witness has been examined yet.

                        Learned counsel further submits that he has no criminal

                        antecedent and he is in custody since 24.07.2025. The petitioner

                        undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.

                                     5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer

                        for regular bail of the petitioner.

                                     6. Considering the allegation that the petitioner had

                        fired upon the deceased, this Court is not inclined to grant bail

                        to the petitioner even though the other co-accused persons have

                        been granted bail.

                                     7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed and

                        the court below is directed to expedite the trial and if the trial is

                        delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer

                        for bail.

                                     8. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna is

                        directed to ensure the appearance of the witnesses in the trial.

                                     9. Let a copy of this order be communicated through

                        FAX or e-mail to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna for

                        its compliance.


                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
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.