Himanshu Choudhary @ Vicky @ Himanshu @ Himanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38758 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== Himanshu Choudhary @ Vicky @ Himanshu @ Himanshu Kumar S/o- Vijay Choudhary Moh- Chandi English Ps- Sanjhauli Dist- Rohtas, PA- Jagdeo Nagar, Boliya Road, P.S- Sasaram, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1 Mr.Sunil Kumar Dubey Mr.Bibhakar Tiwary Mr.Suraj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in Sasaram (M) P. S. Case No. 103 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 192, 109, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Vijay Kumar Choudhary had moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.46241 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 15.09.2025 after considering the case in detail and on merit, on which the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38758 of 2025(7) dt.16-02-2026 2/3 counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that case of this petitioner is not akin to the case of Vijay Kumar Choudhary as Vijay Kumar Choudhary is not alleged to have fired rather the allegation of firing is against the petitioner who is alleged to have fired causing firearm injury to Birendra Kumar and Baby Devi. It is also submitted that this fact has been taken note of in the order dated 15.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.46241 of 2025, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is not seeking anticipatory bail rather is seeking regular bail. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2025, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that trial has commenced and only Doctors and the I.O. remain to be examined. It is also submitted that there are three doctors who were involved in the instant case, as such, examination of the doctors is required. It is also submitted that the next date in the case is 18.02.2026.
4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
5. The prayer of the petitioner for regular bail stands rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38758 of 2025(7) dt.16-02-2026 3/3
6. However, the Court directs the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram to ensure that the official witnesses are examined in the trial without any undue delay.
7. Let a copy of this order be sent to the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T