Patna High Court
Nitish Kumar @ NikkiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court denied regular bail, holding that the seriousness of the murder charge and the material evidence justified continued detention.
Summary
The petitioners, Chintu Mahto and Nitish Kumar, applied for regular bail in murder cases registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR alleged that they, along with unknown persons, murdered the informant's grandson by slitting his throat. The petitioners claimed innocence and argued that the informant was not an eye‑witness and that they were only suspects. The State opposed bail, relying on a witness statement under Section 183 BNSS that placed the petitioners at the scene with weapons, and on the recovery of the alleged murder weapon from one of the petitioners. Considering the gravity of the offence, the evidence on record and the length of custody, the court rejected the bail applications and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within a year.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the witness statement and recovery of the weapon constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
- Whether the duration of pre‑trial custody warrants an expedited trial.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 183, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- pre‑trial detention
- witness statement
- weapon recovery
- expedited trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91303 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- Garahara District- Begusarai
======================================================
Chintu Mahto S/o Bannu Mahto @ Babloo Mahto R/o Village- Hajipur,
Pokhar, Ward No.12, P.S- Garhara, Dist- Begusarai (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 976 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- Garahara District- Begusarai
======================================================
Nitish Kumar @ Nikki S/O Anil Sah R/O Village- Masnadpur, Ward no. 15,
P.S.- Barauni, District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 91303 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nakul Kumar Jamuar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 976 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinesh Maharaj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2026 Both the aforementioned cases are being disposed of
by a common order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant
and learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. Petitioners seek regular bail in connection with
Garhara P. S. Case No. 37 of 2025 registered for the offences
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91303 of 2025(3) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
4. As per F.I.R., informant suspects that all the named
accused persons along with 3-4 unknown persons committed
murder of the grandson of informant by slitting his throat as on
08.05.2025, petitioner Chintu Mahto threatened the deceased
with dire consequences, due to previous enmity.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and petitioners
have been made accused in this case only on suspicion.
Petitioner, namely, Chintu Mahto is in custody since 03.06.2025
and petitioner, namely Nitish Kumar @ Nikki is in custody
since 16.06.2025.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail
application and submitted that during course of investigation, in
statement of witness Rohit Kumar, recorded under Section 183
BNSS, it is stated that he had seen these petitioners along with
other accused persons at the place of occurrence with arms. It is
further submitted that the weapon which was used in
commission of the offence was recovered on the disclosure
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91303 of 2025(3) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
made by petitioner, namely, Nitish Kumar @ Nikki.
7. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of
the offence and other facts and circumstances of the case, prayer
for regular bail of the petitioners is rejected.
8. However, since petitioners are in custody since
03.06.2025 and 16.06.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite
and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of one year
from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…