Dismissed¶25

Nitish Kumar @ Bhola Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Nov 2025CR. MISC./52679/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected; Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No.52679 of 2025; Nitish Kumar @ Bhola Yadav; murder and abduction allegations; IPC Sections 302, 364, 506, 34; Arms Act Section 27; Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 347 of 2023, Begusarai; specific and heinous allegation; firing causing death; neurogenic shock and cardio respiratory failure from firearm head injuries; three criminal antecedents; custody since 24.02.2025; co-accused bail order dated 26.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 30338 of 2024.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, the court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. ¶23

Nitish Kumar @ Bhola Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52679 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2023 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District-

¶3

Begusarai

¶4

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

¶5

Nitish Kumar @ Bhola Yadav S/O Narendra Yadav R/O Village- Chharapati, P.S.- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pranav Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 11-11-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

A.P.P for the State.

¶15

2 . The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 347 of 2023 dated 18.12.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302, 364, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶16

3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have killed the informant’s son. It is further alleged that the co-accused persons Abhiranjan Kumar and Manish Kumar @ Bhopat Yadav called him from his house and took him with them to Malhipur Diyara and thereafter, the petitioner shot the informant’s son dead. It is

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52679 of 2025(2) dt.11-11-2025 2/3

¶18

further alleged that earlier the co-accused Narendra Yadav and his sons also threatened the informant and his family to kill.

¶19

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Similarly situated the co-accused has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 26.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30338 of 2024. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 24.02.2025.

¶20

5 . Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the specific allegation of firing on the informant’s son who died on the spot is against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the informant in his re-statement at para-5 and the witnesses in para-6 & 7 of the case diary have fully supported the prosecution case. As per the post-mortem report of the deceased, the cause of death is due to neurogenic shock and cardio respiratory failure as a result of head injuries caused by firearm.

¶21

6 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52679 of 2025(2) dt.11-11-2025 3/3

¶23

of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the

¶24

petitioner on bail.

¶25

7. Accordingly, the application stands rejected.

¶26

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)