Bipin Kumar @ Vipin Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18664 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Bipin Kumar @ Vipin Kumar S/O Vinay Singh @ Vinay Kumar Singh R/O Village- Karkatpur, P.S- Akorhigola, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-04-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. Rakesh Singh and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 324(4), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and later on Section 103 of the B.N.S. has been added.
3. The present application has been filed renewing the prayer for bail in view of the liberty granted to the petitioner vide order dated 16.02.2026 passed by this Court to approach the Court after framing of charge.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the charges were framed on 23.02.2026 (Annexure-5) as such, the prayer for bail has been renewed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18664 of 2026(3) dt.17-04-2026 2/3 Learned senior counsel further submits that there is a virtually no eye witness to the present incident and perusal of the First Information Report would show that the informant also is not an eye witness. The Panchnama which was prepared at the Trauma Center and Super-specialty Hospital, Varanasi has been pointed out before this Court to contend that the same bears the signature of the family members of the deceased and yet no names of any accused has been whispered in the said Panchnama. It has further been submitted that while the occurrence is said to have taken place 23.06.2025 the FIR was lodged on 27.06.2025 without tendering any explanation for such delay. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 28.06.2025 with no criminal antecedent and he is a young boy aged about 19 years.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail. However, he does not controvert the fact that the Panchnama which forms a part of the case diary does not indicate the names of the accused persons and that the FIR has also been lodged after delay.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and considering the factum of delay coupled with the fact that there appears to be no eye witness to occurrence and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18664 of 2026(3) dt.17-04-2026 3/3 the entire case rests only on suspicion, let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 260 of 2025, subject to the conditions that:
(I) One of the bailors would be the family member or relative.
(II) The petitioner would appear physically on each and every date in the learned court below and would cooperate in the conclusion of trial and if the petitioner does not appear on two consecutive dates without any substantial and satisfactory reason, the learned court below would be at liberty to cancel his bail bonds.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T