Dismissed¶24

Parnaw Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 May 2025CR. APP (SJ)/239/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: bail rejection appeal dismissed; B.N.S., 2023 Sections 103(1), 3(5); SC/ST Act Section 3(2)(v); Arms Act Section 27; murder by firing; implication through confessional statement of co-accused Anuj Kumar, Pawan Kumar, Dhiraj Kumar; appellant not named in FIR; general and omnibus allegations; postmortem report; one criminal antecedent; judicial custody since 26.11.2024; charge-sheet filed; six-month trial completion direction; liberty to renew bail prayer; Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST)/ADJ Vaishali at Hajipur; Bidupur P.S. Case No. 575 of 2024; Vaishali at Hajipur; Patna High Court.

What did the court decide?

Bail declined; appeal dismissed with direction to the court below to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months, failing which the appellant may renew his bail prayer before the court below. ¶24

Parnaw Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant should be granted bail in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 575 of 2024 (Sections 103(1) and 3(5), B.N.S., 2023; Section 3(2)(v), SC/ST Act; Section 27, Arms Act), his bail prayer having been rejected by the trial court on 17.12.2024.

¶15

Court's answer

Taking into account the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the appellant, the Court is not inclined to grant him bail.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is dismissed, with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude it expeditiously, preferably within six months; if the trial is not concluded within that period, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his bail prayer before the court below, to be decided on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail appeal dismissed — Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.), by order dated 08-05-2025, dismissed Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 239 of 2025 filed by Parnaw Kumar against the order dated 17.12.2024 of the Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST) Act-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur rejecting his bail prayer in Bidupur P.S. Case No. 575 of 2024 under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising from the fatal shooting of the informant's son Vipin Kumar. Appellant not named in the FIR, allegedly implicated on the basis of co-accused confessional statements; charge-sheet submitted; in custody since 26.11.2024 with one criminal antecedent. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, bail was declined; the trial court was directed to conclude the trial preferably within six months, failing which the appellant may renew his bail prayer, to be decided on its own merit without prejudice to this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.239 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-575 Year-2024 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Parnaw Kumar S/o Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Ray R/o Village- Nanahakchak, PS- Bidupur, Distt- Vaishali at Hajipur

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Awadhesh Bhagat S/o Late Yadu Bhagat R/o vill - Khajbatta, P.O. - Chaksikandar, ward no. 13, P.S.- Bidupur, Pin 844503, Distt.- Vaishali at Hajipur

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Om Prakash Om, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, SPP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

6 08-05-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned

¶14

Special Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the case diary.

¶15

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST) Act -cum- Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 575 of 2024 under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and later on added Section 27 of the Arms Act, was rejected.

¶16

As per prosecution case, some unknown miscreants fired bullet in the chest of the Informant’s son namely Vipin

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.239 of 2025(6) dt.08-05-2025 2/3

¶18

Kumar due to which he died at the spot.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case with false and frivolous allegations and merely on the basis of suspicion. The appellant is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has transpired in this case in course of investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of the accused persons. There is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. Even the Informant is not the eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. There is no direct or specific allegation of any overt act against the appellant rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The specific allegation of firing upon the deceased is against the co-accused Pawan Kumar. The postmortem report shows the reason of the death of the deceased due to syncome leading from hemorrhage and lacerstion of lungs and heart and, thus, the postmortem report does not support the prosecution case. The appellant has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail and is languishing in judicial custody since 26.11.2024 without any rhymes or reason. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶20

Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant, stating that

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.239 of 2025(6) dt.08-05-2025 3/3

¶22

the offence alleged against the appellant is serious in nature. Though the appellant is not named in the F.I.R. but, his complicity in the alleged occurrence has come in the confessional statement of the co-accused Anuj Kumar, Pawan Kumar and Dhiraj Kumar. The appellant has also confessed his guilt of being involved in the alleged occurrence. The postmortem report supports the prosecution case.

¶23

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking to into account the nature and gravity of the offence as alleged against the appellant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant.

¶24

Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed with a direction to the learned court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period of six months, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the court below which will be decided on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶25

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶26

rishi/-

¶27

U T

Parnaw Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parnaw Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brajesh Chouhan Vs The State of Bihar

Shravan Kumar Roy @ Sarwan Kumar Ray @ Sharvan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bimlesh Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Nasir @ Nasiruddin Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Firdaush @ Firdosh @ Md. Firdos Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Nat Vs The State of Bihar