SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3678

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Kishori Prasad @ Raj Kishore Prasad, Pintu Kumar @ Pintu @ Anirudh Prasad, Lalita Devi, Rinki Devi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35347 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Krishna Pd.Singh, Senior Advocate, Mr. Satya Veer, Advocate
For the Respondents: Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.

The court grants pre-arrest bail considering lack of eyewitness evidence and previous acquittals of co-accused.

Headnote:The court examined Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, addressing the apprehension of arrest concerning the accused in a case alleging murder by assault. The prosecution claimed that the accused brutally killed the informant's sister, with no eyewitnesses, while the defense claimed undue implication due to familial disputes. The court found merit in the petitioners' argument for bail, acknowledging prior acquittals of similar accused, thereby concluding that the bail petition should be granted under specific conditions.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

6 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. As per prosecution case, all the FIR named accused persons including these petitioners killed informant’s sister by brutally assaulting her with lathi, danda and threw the dead body in the forest near Pakva river. It is further alleged that when the informant went to the house of his sister, he found blood trail in front of the house and accused persons had fled away from their house.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that these petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion. From perusal of the FIR, it is evident that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. As a matter of fact, petitioners are close agnates of deceased and there is land dispute between the parties. Police after investigation submitted final form against the petitioners but the Court below differing with the same took cognizance of the offence. Some of the similarly situated accused persons, namely, Anugrah Prasad and Bipin Kumar have already been acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 12.4.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 394 of 2018/608 of 2019.

Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of these petitioners is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let these petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Sherghati, Gaya in Bhadwar Police Station Case No.

18/2017, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top