Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33540 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2025 Thana- AIRPORT District- Patna ====================================================== Vijay Kumar S/O Ugrasen Prasad @ Agrasen R/O Village - Navdiha, P.SHilsa Dhurgaon, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate : Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ayush Abhishek, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ayush Abhishek, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 16.04.2025 in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. Case No. 73 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 13.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 137 (2) (363 I.P.C), 140 (3) (365 I.P.C), 61 (2) (120BI.P.C) of B.N.S later on chargesheet was submitted under Section 103(1),140(3), 319(2), 111(2), 111(6), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS and Section 66(c)(d) of I.T Act.
3. According to prosecution case, informant's sisterin-law's husband was kidnapped by some unknown persons.
2/4
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Initially the present FIR has been instituted against co-accused person, namely, Shiv Raj Sagi for kidnapping the victim but during course of investigation one co-accused person, namely, Sumit Kumar @ Jitu was apprehended and he has confessed his guilt and stated that he alongwith other coaccused persons have committed the present crime in question and informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and co-accused person, namely, Bipatra Kumar, who is owner of the vehicle in question, which was used in the present crime in question, has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 03.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
13018 of 2026 and co-accused, namely, Sangita Kumari @ Choti, against whom the allegation that she also accompanied alongwith the co-accused person, has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.69280 of 2025. The police, after investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State have opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
3/4 and submits that the petitioner has participated in the present crime in question and co-accused persons have brutally assaulted the deceased and he died, apart from that, the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but he fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as the period of custody, let the petitioner, 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 learned A.C.J.M.-IV, Patna in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. Case No. 73 of 2025, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner 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 on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner and in case at
4/4 any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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) Nitesh/- U T