Shivam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22833 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2024 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna ====================================================== Shivam Kumar S/o Shambhu Sao R/o Village- Parsa Naubatpur, Nagwan Khas, P.S- Naubatpur, Dist- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 255 of 2024, registered for the offences under Sections 302 of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, informant received a phone call that petitioner shot dead informant's wife and fled away from the spot.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. From the FIR it is apparent that the informant is not an eye witness. Even during investigation, police did not record statement of any eye witness. The whole case is based on suspicion. Petitioner is a 19 year old boy and he is in custody since 18.11.2024. Petitioner is having antecedent of two cases and he is on bail in both the cases.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22833 of 2026(5) dt.15-07-2026 2/2

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner the he shot dead the wife of the informant and this fact was supported by the witnesses who were examined during investigation. The petitioner is having antecedent of two cases under Arms Act and also for other offences.

6. Having regard to the specific nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, at the earliest, considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for about quarter to two years and even charges have not been framed till 01.07.2026 as is evident from the communication received from learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Patna City.

8. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna is directed to ensure the presence of witnesses once charges are framed and the matter is fixed for prosecution evidence. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) Anuradha/- U T