Patna High Court
Monu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Monu Kumar sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case involving the murder of an informant's son, alleged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that three unknown persons shot the victim, and during investigation the petitioner’s name surfaced, though he was not originally named in the FIR. The petitioner asserted his innocence, clean antecedents, and that he was not a suspect. The State countered that several witnesses identified the petitioner and CCTV footage showed him holding a pistol. After considering the material evidence and the seriousness of the offences, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a murder and arms possession case based on the evidence presented.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- murder
- CCTV evidence
- investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90913 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-813 Year-2025 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada
======================================================
Monu Kumar S/O Binod Yadav Resident Of Village - Domanbag, P.S-
Kawakole, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and
3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, son of informant was shot
dead by three unknown persons.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R..
Name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of
investigation. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90913 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
2/2
the petitioner and submitted that during course of investigation,
number of witnesses have identified this petitioner and in the
C.C.T.V. footage also, this petitioner was seen holding pistol in
his hand.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and materials that have surfaced during course of investigation,
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is
rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…