Vimlesh Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89494 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2025 Thana- Mehsoul District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Vimlesh Kumar Jha S/O Nawal Jha @ Nawal Kishore Jha Resident of Village- Bhasar, P.S.- Dumra, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :
Dr. (Mrs.) Indiwar Kumari, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Ashish Kumar Ranjan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126, 115(2), 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 as well as Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedents of two cases. It is next submitted that the informant alleges that his elder son, Basim Anwar Khan @ Puttu had come to his house and was looking perturbed, accordingly, the informant asked his son why he is looking perturbed, on which he disclosed that Asgar Hussain, Md. Nasir
2/4 Ahmad, Devendra Shah, Dhananjay Kumar, Azizur Rahman and petitioner had met in the shop of Ejaj Shah for the purposes of getting him killed and have also given money to the shooters and the shooters can kill him any time. It is further alleged that his son also disclosed that he had recorded the aforesaid fact in his mobile, further his son also disclosed that Lal's brother Md. Islam is also involved in the conspiracy and the aforesaid accused persons can get him killed any time, on which informant asked his son that why he did not disclose the said fact to the police, on which his son said that in the morning he will accompany the informant to the police station for giving information to the police about the conspiracy.
It is next alleged that thereafter his son left for his house and when he reached near his house, the informant heard sound of firing, accordingly, he came out and saw that his son was shot and his family members Sahin Anwar Khan and Sahil Parwez disclosed that they have seen the three shooters who committed the occurrence, but they did not know their name but can identify by their face.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
3/4 allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is next submitted that during course of investigation also, no material transpired connecting the petitioner with the offence. It is next submitted that Dhananjay Kumar had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No.65688 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 16.01.2026. It is further submitted that case of the petitioner is on much better footing than Dhananjay Kumar.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the anticipatory bail application but then learned counsel for the informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that case of the petitioner is on a better footing than Dhananjay Kumar but then it is submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond on which the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
4/4 from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Mehsoul P.S. Case No.89 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father, namely, Nawal Jha @ Nawal Kishore Jha.
8. It is further made clear that in the event if chargesheet is submitted and the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner is not cooperating in framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial in any manner, in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T