Vishal Kumar @ Chhotu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82015 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2025 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== Vishal Kumar @ Chhotu, Male, aged about 19 years, Son of Lal Babu Singh, Resident of Village- Nandani Path West Patel Nagar, P.S.- Sashtri Nagar, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Shashtrinagar P.S. Case No. 182 of 2025 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, informant has gone to his brother's house and all of a sudden, his cousins and aunt appeared there and started quarreling with his brother, which was pacified, but after some time, the accused persons again started quarreling, during which one accused threw bricks upon his brother's head, in the result there of, he fell down into the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82015 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 2/3 well situated in the court-yard in which the informant's brother was taken to the hospital, where he died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case due to property dispute. He submits that the accused Manju Devi is own aunt (chachi) of the informant. He further submits that in the postmorten reports the cause of death was due to sink in water and not due to the injury of brick. Petitioner is in custody since 16.03.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the FIR, case diary, postmortem report and also perused the impugned order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Patna it appears that allegation against this petitioner is specific that he thrown brick upon the deceased, due to which he fell down in the well and died. From perusal of the records, it also appears that on the basis of written report of the informant, FIR has been registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS against the present petitioner. It also appears that there is specific allegation against the present petitioner that he thrown
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82015 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 3/3 bricks on the deceased due to which he fell down in the well and died, so considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
8. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court after completion of one year of custody. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.
U T