Vikku Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vikku Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail: petitioner to be released after framing of charge (if not already framed) on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Court below, subject to conditions that one bailor be an own/close family member and that the petitioner appear on every trial date, with default on two consecutive dates entitling the Trial Court to cancel the bail bonds.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, booked in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024 (Section 394 IPC / Section 27 Arms Act), should be released on bail.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, the Court is inclined to grant him bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024.

Key takeaways

Release is made subject to conditions: one of the bailors shall be an own/close member of the petitioner's family, and the petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial, failing which on two consecutive dates the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel his bail bonds.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.), order dated 14-05-2025 in Crl. Misc. No.8479 of 2025, grants bail to Vikku Kumar in Telmar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024 (District Nalanda), instituted for offences under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising from an alleged gun-point robbery of Rs. 1 lakh and firing on the informant. Counsel argued the petitioner was unnamed in the FIR, transpired only via a co-accused's confessional statement, with no recovery of looted cash, no T.I. parade and only general/omnibus allegations; he was in custody since 31.07.2024 with three criminal antecedents (on bail in one), charge-sheet had been submitted, and a similarly situated co-accused had been bailed on 28.04.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 4717 of 2025. Weighing these circumstances and the custody period, the Court directed release on bail after framing of charge (if not already framed) on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, one bailor to be an own/close family member, and with a default clause allowing cancellation of bail bonds on absence from two consecutive trial dates.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8479 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2024 Thana- TELMAR District- Nalanda

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

Vikku Kumar S/O Raju Singh @ Rajo Singh Resident of Village- Monipur, P.S.- Nagarnausha, District- Nalanda

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mohit Agarwal, Advocate Mr. Lokesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vikash Khanna, Advocate Mr. Aman Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ======================================================

... ... Opposite Party/s

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

ORAL ORDER

3 14-05-2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

APP for the State and perused the case diary.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, in short, is that, some unknown miscreants allegedly robbed informant’s brother-inlaw of Rs. 1 lakh at gun point, fired upon the informant due to which he sustained injury and in the meantime, the miscreants fled away from the spot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8479 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 2/3

present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused person and the same has got no evidentiary value. It is next submitted that neither any recovery of looted cash has been made from the possession of the petitioner nor any T.I. parade has been conducted in this case. No specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioner, rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2024 and has got three criminal antecedents in which he is on bail in one case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that similarly situated co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 4717 of 2025.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8479 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 3/3

Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing

of charge, if not already framed on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Rajorshi/-

U T