Vinit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Zainul Abedin, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 24-03-2025

¶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 Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No. 3 of 2024 dated 09.01.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/ss 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶16

3. As per the prosecution case, on 08.01.2024, a Chhatiyar ceremony was going on in the neighbouring house of the informant, in the meantime, the co-accused Ranjay Ram and Manjay Ram came to the house of the informant and they took away the informant’s son Guudu Kumar forcefully. A dance programme was also going on at the gate of the co-accused,

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8539 of 2025(2) dt.24-03-2025 2/3

¶18

Shanti Devi and many people were called by the co-accused, Shanti Devi and they were watching dance programme after taking meal. It is further alleged that the co-accused, Ranjay Ram fired on the informant’s son who sustained gunshot injury on his back. Thereafter, the the informant took his son to the hospital where the doctor declared him dead.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case during the course of investigation. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather the specific allegation of firing on the informant’s son is against the co-accused, Ranjay Ram. The coaccused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 28.08.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50302 of 2024. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2024.

¶20

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that in para 40 of the case diary, the petitioner was holding country

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8539 of 2025(2) dt.24-03-2025 3/3

¶22

made pistol. As per the post-mortem report of the deceased, the cause of death is shock and hemorrhage due to vital organ injuries, caused by firearm.

¶23

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Raxaul at Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No. 3 of 2024.

¶24

7. The application stands allowed.

¶25

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶26

Gautam/-

¶27

U T

Vinit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinit 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

Janki Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Mahesh Das Vs The State of Bihar

Bijali Mukhia Vs The State of Bihar

Sahil @ Rashal Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raghubir Paswan Vs The State of Bihar