Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Suraj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2024)

Home
Patna HC
2024
Suraj Kumar Vs the State of BiharSuraj Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Dismissed¶20

Suraj Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Bail rejected – S.302 IPC and S.27 Arms Act

Patna HC3 Dec 2024CR. MISC./47330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suraj Kumar s/o Bijendra Prasad Mandal - bail application CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47330 of 2024, Patna High Court, decided 03-12-2024 by Rudra Prakash Mishra, J. - bail rejected in murder case (Section 302 IPC read with Section 27 Arms Act), Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023, Thana Amarpur, District Banka - specific allegation of firing on the deceased supported by post-mortem report - defence pointed to no recovery of firearm/incriminating article, no eye-witness, custody since 14.12.2023, no criminal antecedent - trial court directed to expedite trial - State represented by APP Sangeeta Sharma; informant represented by Dhananjay Kumar Pandey.

What did the court decide?

Bail is declined because there is a specific allegation of firing upon the deceased, further supported by the post-mortem report. ¶19

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, implicated in Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023 for offences under Sections 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, deserves release on bail.

Court's answer

Bail is declined because there is a specific allegation of firing upon the deceased, further supported by the post-mortem report.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's prayer for grant of bail is rejected.

Key takeaways

The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail rejected - S.302 IPC and S.27 Arms Act - Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023, District Banka. Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J., single member) refused regular bail to Suraj Kumar, holding that the specific allegation of firing upon the deceased, corroborated by the post-mortem report, outweighed the defence submissions (false implication due to family dispute, no recovery of firearm or incriminating article from conscious possession, no eye-witness, custody since 14.12.2023, no criminal antecedent). While rejecting bail, the Court directed the learned trial Court to expedite the trial. Decided 03-12-2024.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47330 of 2024

rising Out of PS. Case No.-838 Year-2023 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka

======================================================

SURAJ KUMAR SON OF BIJENDRA PRASAD MANDAL RESIDENT OF MANJHGAIN, P.S. - SAMBHUGANJ, DISTRICT - BANKA

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vibhakar Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP For the Informant : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

ORAL ORDER

5 03-12-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the case diary.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is of firing upon the deceased due to which he died.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to family dispute. No incriminating article or firearm has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and also there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. It has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47330 of 2024(5) dt.03-12-2024 2/2

submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2023 and has no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that several prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. Learned APP further submitted that post-mortem report also corroborates the case of the prosecution. Learned counsel jointly submitted that there is direct allegation of firing upon the deceased against this petitioner, therefore, he does not deserve to be released on bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

of the case and also there being specific allegation of firing upon the deceased which is further supported by the postmortem report, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected.

Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Alok Verma/-

U T

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, implicated in Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023 for offences under Sections 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, deserves release on bail.¶12
The court held
Bail is declined because there is a specific allegation of firing upon the deceased, further supported by the post-mortem report.ratio¶19

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Indian Penal Code302¶12
Arms Act27¶12

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
FIR registered as Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023, District Banka, for offences under Sections 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act; petitioner sought bail in connection therewith.¶12
Prior proceeding
Allegation against the petitioner is of firing upon the deceased, resulting in his death.¶13
Prior proceeding
Petitioner in custody since 14.12.2023 and stated to have no criminal antecedent.¶16

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Suraj Kumar Son of Bijendra Prasad Mandal¶4
Vibhakar Kumar
respondent
THE STATE OF BIHAR¶6
Sangeeta Sharma
other
Informant¶6
Dhananjay Kumar Pandey

Coram

AI extract

Rudra Prakash Mishraauthor¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Patna HC
Decided on: 3 Dec 2024 · December
Registered: 28 Jun 2024
Case no.: CR. MISC./47330/2024
CNR: BRHC010509282024
Topic: Murder and Culpable Homicide
Bench: R. P. Mishra
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Case type: CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from R. P. Mishra

Sher Khan @ Sher Mohammad Vs The State of Bihar
2 Dec 2024
Manish Sharma @ Manish Vs The State of Bihar
2 Dec 2024
Ritesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar
2 Dec 2024
Taj @ Taj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar
3 Dec 2024
Darogi Yadav Vs The State of Bihar
3 Dec 2024
Dinesh Baski Vs the State of Bihar
3 Dec 2024

Cite this judgement

Suraj Kumar v. the State of Bihar, CR. MISC./47330/2024 (PAT), decided on 3 December 2024.

The Patna High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Indian Penal Code302
Arms Act27

View all statutes

Procedural history3

FIR registered as Amarpur P.S. Case No. 838 of 2023, District Banka, for offences under Sections 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act; petitioner sought bail in connection therewith.
Allegation against the petitioner is of firing upon the deceased, resulting in his death.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Rudra Prakash Mishra

Parties & counsel