Shiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prosecution case, in short, is that, on the alleged date and time, the informant’s husband, who worked as a driver, left for Ranchi with his vehicle for dropping passengers, but he went missing and next morning his mobile phone got switched off.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5715 of 2025(3) dt.05-05-2025 2/3

¶20

transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Nagendra Kumar. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is being dragged in this case merely because he had booked the vehicle of the deceased on fare and had also paid to him. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 23.07.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that as per material available in the case diary, this petitioner in connivance with co-accused Nagendra Kumar hatched a conspiracy to commit loot and murder of the deceased by booking the vehicle of the deceased on rent. He further submitted that this petitioner has himself confessed his guilt and specifically narrated the manner in which he along with co-accused Nagendra Kumar committed the murder of the deceased which is substantiated by the post-mortem report. Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 309(6), 238, 336(2), 340(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being ample material against the petitioner in

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5715 of 2025(3) dt.05-05-2025 3/3

¶24

the case diary, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶25

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

¶26

Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

¶27

However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months from today. If any such application is filed before the learned court below, the court concerned shall consider the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶28

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶29

Alok Verma/-

¶30

U T

Shiv Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv 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

Lalinder Yadav @ Lalinder Kumar @ Ravinder Yadav @ Ravinder Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Raja @ Raja Vs The State of Bihar

Harsh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Lalu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Umashankar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar