Vikesh Pandey Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

Vikesh Pandey Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bikramganj, Rohtas/concerned Court below, in connection with Karakat P.S. Case No. 293 of 2025, subject to the conditions that one bailor be his own blood relative and that he remain physically present in court on every trial date (bail bonds liable to cancellation on two consecutive unjustified absences).

Issue for consideration

Whether Vikesh Pandey, accused along with other(s) of killing the informant's father in an offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. (Karakat P.S. Case No. 293 of 2025), should be released on bail.

Court's answer

The Court treated the matter as a case of no eye-witness, based on suspicion, with the FIR itself indicating cordial relations between the deceased and the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was ordered released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bikramganj, Rohtas/concerned Court below, in connection with Karakat P.S. Case No. 293 of 2025.

Key takeaways

Condition (i): one of the bailors must be the petitioner's own blood relative, preferably father, mother, brother or sister.ratio¶23
Condition (ii): the petitioner must remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial.ratio¶24
If the petitioner fails to appear on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Smt. Soni Shrivastava, J.), Oral Order dt. 09-06-2026, CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26852 of 2026, arising out of Karakat P.S. Case No. 293 of 2025 (Rohtas): bail granted to Vikesh Pandey, alleged along with other(s) to have killed the informant's father, offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. Counsel urged that the FIR itself showed the deceased habitually visited the houses of Arun Pandey and the petitioner, that on 02.06.2025 he went there, did not return, and was found in their premises with bleeding injuries; that investigation materials (paras 8, 9, 11, 44 of the bail rejection order) showed implication purely on suspicion, with neither direct evidence, eye-witness nor motive. The APP opposed bail citing criminal antecedents, to which counsel responded that the petitioner is on bail in all such cases. The Court, taking the case to be one of no eye-witness based on suspicion with the FIR showing cordial relations, and noting custody since 05.06.2025 with charge-sheet submitted, released the petitioner on a Rs. 10,000/- bail bond with two like sureties before the 2nd District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bikramganj, Rohtas, conditioned on a blood-relative bailor and presence on every trial date, failing which (two consecutive unjustified absences) the bonds may be cancelled.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26852 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-293 Year-2025 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas

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

Vikesh Pandey S/o Late Arun Pandey R/o Village - Jamua Tola, P.S - Karakat, District - Rohtas

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

3 09-06-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S.

As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioner along with other killed his father.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be evident from the First Information Report itself that it was normal affair that the deceased used to go to the house of Arun Pandey and his son Vikesh Pandey (petitioner herein) and used to engage in normal talks. Even on 02.06.2025, the deceased had gone to the premises of Arun Pandey and the petitioner where they were talking very normally. Since the deceased did not come back in the night, the informant went in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26852 of 2026(3) dt.09-06-2026 2/3

search and found that the deceased had fallen in the premises of the petitioner and Arun Pandey, with bleeding injuries. The petitioner along with Arun Pandey was thus made an accused only on the basis of suspicion. The materials collected during the course of investigation especially paragraph nos.8, 9, 11 and 44, as mentioned in the bail rejection order, only indicate the fact that the deceased had gone to the premises of the petitioner and his father and did not come back in the night and the implication of the petitioner is based purely on suspicion. There is neither any direct evidence nor any eye-witness and further no motive also has been alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted.

Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedent. However, in response it has been submitted that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and considering the fact that it appears to be a case of no eye-witness and is based on suspicion and further, the FIR itself indicates cordial relations between the deceased and the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, be released

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26852 of 2026(3) dt.09-06-2026 3/3

on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 2^nd District and Additional Sessions Judge, Bikramganj, Rohtas/concerned Court below in connection with Karakat P.S. Case No. 293 of 2025 subject to condition that:-

(i) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.

(Soni Shrivastava, J)

anand/-

U T