Guddu Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj v. The State of Bihar
CR. APP (SJ)/1206/2026 · 2026-05-11
Sandeep Kumar
Criminal Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14547 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14547 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1206 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2024 Thana- KARPI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Guddu Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj S/o Ramratan Singh R/o Village - Hanshraj Bagh, P.S - Karpi, District - Jehanabad ... ... Appellant/s Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Chandesh Kumar S/o Umesh Ram R/o Village - Khazuri Tola, Ramkishun Bigha, P.S - Karpi, District - Jehanabad ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Pritish Kumar Lal For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 11-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 21.02.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Jehanabad in connection with Karpi P.S. Case No. 85 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 of the Arms Act and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(r) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Earlier the bail applications of the appellant were rejected twice vide orders dated 21.09.2024 and 10.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68172 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 27923 of 2025 respectively.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1206 of 2026(3) dt.11-05-2026 2/2
4. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since
25.03.2024.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State has opposed the application of the appellant and has submitted that the trial of the case has been stopped by this Court on the application of the appellant.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
Vikas/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U