Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4619 (PAT)

Vishal Kumar v. The State of Bihar

CR. APP (SJ)/5082/2025 · 2026-04-15

Sandeep Kumar

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5082 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2025 Thana- SIKARHATTA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Vishal Kumar S/o Birendra Singh @ Virendra Singh R/o Village - Sikaraul Fatehpur, P.S - Tarari, District - Bhojpur at Ara ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar Bihar 2. Ravi Nandan Prasad S/o Mahendra Ram R/o village - Patkhauli, P.S - Sikrahatta, District - Bhojpur at Ara ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 15-04-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 15.09.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhojpur at Ara, whereby the prayer for bail application of the appellant in connection with Sikarhatta P.S. Case No. 88 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS and under Section 3(i)(r), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, was rejected. 3. The appellant is not named in the FIR. He was found talking to one Basant thrice on phone, who was named in the FIR. In paragraph 28 of the case diary, it has come that the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5082 of 2025(3) dt.15-04-2026 2/2 brother of the deceased has named in the appellant and has said that the deceased has named the appellant as one of his assailants. 4. In the opinion of this Court, when the deceased would have named the petitioner as one of the assailants then his name should have been mentioned in the FIR. 5. The appellant is in custody since 15.09.2025. 6. Learned Special P.P. for the State and informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application is allowed and accordingly, the order dated 15.09.2025 is hereby set aside. 8. Let the appellant be released on bail upon 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 Sikarhatta P.S. Case No. 88 of 2025. Vikas/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U