Sandeep Kumar @ Salu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10569 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Shaurabh Kumar @ Alter @ Saurav Kumar Son of Late Satyendra Singh Resident of Village- Chiroura, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13662 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Sandeep Kumar @ Salu S/O Late Manoj Prasad @ Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Sharan R/O Village- Chiroura, P.S- Naubatpur, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10569 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pathak, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13662 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Hansraj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State (In Cr. Misc. No. 10569 of 2026) and Mr. Hansraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State (In Cr. Misc. No. 13662 of 2026).
2/4
2. Petitioners seeks bail in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 288 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 109, 103(1), 303(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and 27 of Arms Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioners is that they alongwith other accused persons have murdered the informant's son Prashant Kumar by opening fire from an illegal fire arm (Pistol).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and they falsely been implicated in the present case. Although the petitioners are named in the FIR and there is specific allegation against them that they have fired upon the victim but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that FIR is in two parts, in first part specific allegation of firing is attributed against the petitioners and other co-accused persons and in second part allegation against firing is attributed against co-accused person, namely, Chandan Kumar. Although the deceased had received six bullet injuries but it is not clear that whose bullet injury was found on the person of the deceased and co-accused, person, namely, Ankit Kumar has been granted the privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated 17.01.2026 in Cr. Misc. No. 83741 of 2025 and the petitioner, namely,
3/4 Shaurabh Kumar @ Alter @ Saurav Kumar is in custody since 06.08.2025 and petitioner, namely, Sandeep Kumar @ Salu is in custody since 16.05.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that victim had supported the case of the prosecution and on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Sandeep Kumar and Ankit Kumar, one country made pistol which was used in the present crime in question has been recovered from the place of occurrence and apart from that the said Ankit Kumar has clean antecedent. He further submits that both the petitioners carries three criminal antecedents other than the present one.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-VI, Danapur, Patna in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 288 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
4/4 on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T