Vishwakarma Gond @ Vishwakarma Kumar Gond v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54892 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2024 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan ====================================================== Vishwakarma Gond @ Vishwakarma Kumar Gond S/o Akshaylal Gond @ Acchelal Gond Resident of village - Sarna, PS- Darauli, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ayush Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Guthani P.S. Case No. 322 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections-103, 3(5) of the BNS and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to the FIR, the prosecution's case in brief is that the informant's wife and daughter had gone to Gorakhpur Hospital for treatment and on their way back, they informed the informant via phone to bring the informant's wife home from Guthni intersection. Upon receiving the information, the informant's son Chandan Kumar went to Guthni intersection on his bike and on his way back home, Chandan Kumar (24 years

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54892 of 2025(5) dt.12-01-2026 2/2 old) was shot dead by some unknown criminals near Barpaliya Primary School on 13.11.2024 at 08:45 pm. Three criminals were riding on two bikes who overtook the informant's bike and shot him and after shooting, they fled towards Darauli.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and except confessional statement in another case, there is nothing against the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the petitioner has 11 criminal antecedents including this case. The petitioner has confessed his guilt giving a vivid description of the entire occurrence. C.D.R. shows that there were conversations between the deceased and the co-accused persons on the date of occurrence and the tower location of mobile set of the petitioner was near the place of occurrence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail and accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U T