Dismissed¶23

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Mar 2026CR. MISC./213/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected - second bail application - Patna High Court - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.213 of 2026 - Justice Sourendra Pandey - order dated 18-03-2026 - Sessions Trial No. 721 of 2024 - Masaurhi/MASAUDHI P.S. Case No. 75 of 2024, District Patna - Sections 363 and 365 IPC, later Sections 302, 201, 120(B) and 34 IPC - allegation of taking away informant's son and murder, Rs. 8,000/- due - recovery on confessional statement - earlier rejection dated 12.05.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 86547 of 2024 - no new grounds - three witnesses examined - application dismissed - Trial Court to conclude trial within a year.

What did the court decide?

None - prayer for regular bail rejected. ¶23

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.213 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2024 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan Kumar, Son of Birju Yadav, Resident of VillageLakhapur, P.S.- Parsbigha, District- Jehanabad.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Adv. Ms. Meena Kumari, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Meena Singh, APP ======================================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 18-03-2026

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶12

learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

This is second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail. Earlier his application for bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 86547 of 2024.

¶14

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 721 of 2024 arising out of Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 75 of 2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Section(s) 302, 201, 120(B) and 34 of the

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.213 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026 2/3

¶16

I.P.C. were also added.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner is that he had called the informant’s son from the house and had taken him away at the instance of paying Rs. 8,000/-, which was due to him and, thereafter, committed the murder of the son of the informant.

¶18

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though he has been named in the F.I.R., but the story propounded against him that he had called the informant’s son is false and concocted. It has further been submitted that no occurrence, as alleged, had ever taken place as the petitioner used to work at Hyderabad in connection with his livelihood and there is no dispute between the petitioner and the deceased as alleged by the prosecution. It has next been submitted that the petitioner had willfully surrendered before the police when he came to know about his impleadment in the present case and he was beaten by the police and was forced to sign on a blank sheet of paper on which his confessional statement is stated to have been recorded. It has also been submitted that the trial has already begun and three witnesses have already been examined. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner carries no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 05.02.2024.

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.213 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026 3/3

¶20

The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that on the confessional statement of the petitioner, the deadbody of the deceased was recovered. It has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is ample material against him collected during the course of investigation, showing his involvement in the present case and moreover from the report received from the Trial Court, three witnesses have been examined.

¶21

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and finding no new grounds, this Court is not inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of regular bail.

¶22

The prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.

¶23

The application stands dismissed.

¶24

It is, however, observed that the Trial Court shall conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a year.

¶25

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶26

Praveen-II/-

¶27

U T

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan 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

Savita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Jeenat Bano @ Zeenat Bano Vs The Union of India

Naborasul Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Uttam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Varun Mandal @ Barun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sharad Chandra Mishra Vs The State of Bihar