Rahul Kumar @ Aryan Kumar @ Aryan Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23871 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2025 Thana- Mufassil District- Khagaria

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

Rahul Kumar @ Aryan Kumar @ Aryan S/o- Bilchandra Sah @ Indradeo Prasad Arya Resident of Marar South, PS- Morkhai District- Khagaria

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP For the Informant : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 19-06-2026

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶10

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the BNS.

¶11

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that one Shivam Kumar has taken son of the informant on bike for wandering. When he did not return till night, the informant asked Shivam Kumar who did not disclose any sufficient answer. On 16.10.2025, the dead body of informant’s son was seen in fields. The informant suspects that the petitioner along with others have killed the son of the informant.

¶12

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23871 of 2026(3) dt.19-06-2026 2/3

¶13

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

¶14

has submitted that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that the informant is not the eye-witness. During course of investigation, Shivam Kumar has given his confessional statement. In confessional statement he has stated that the petitioner was also there when they were having party. After that Shivam, Vishal and Shivmani have killed he deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that even from the confessional statement given before police, only role attributed to the petitioner is that he was present with the co-accused persons while making party. Learned counsel has further submitted that similarly situated other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court vide Cr. Misc. No. 17019 of 2026. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.10.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

¶15

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23871 of 2026(3) dt.19-06-2026 3/3

¶18

C.J.M., Khagaria in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025.

¶19

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶20

Shubham/-

¶21

U T

Rahul Kumar @ Aryan Kumar @ Aryan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar @ Aryan Kumar @ Aryan 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

Shobhanand Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Afaque @ Silti Vs The State of Bihar

Kundan Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Surjeet Sada @ Surjeet Kumar Sada @ Hanthkatta Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ashutosh Kumar @ Ashutosh Singh Vs The State of Bihar