Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20263/2025dismissed

Vikky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-30Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20263 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Vikky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Son of Motilal Sahni Resident of Village/Mohalla- Ward No. 09, Malahi Tola, Lal Saraia, P.S.- Majhauliya, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 263 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 03.10.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 69436 of 2024, which reads as follows:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 263 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20263 of 2025(6) dt.30-01-2026 2/2

3. For committed loot, unknown accused persons have stabbed the victim and thereafter, they tied the hands, legs and mouth of the victim and threw him. Mobile phone, Rs. 22,000/- and one watch was looted by the accused persons. The petitioner's name has come in the self inculpatory statement of the co-accused. Other materials have also come against the petitioner to connect him in the case. The looted mobile phones have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is in jail since 04.07.2024.

4. Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the charges have been framed, but no witness has been examined and therefore, the petitioner may be granted bail.

5. Considering the fact that trial has started, no ground for review is made out. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T