Patna High Court
Deepak Rai @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Yadav @ Indrajeet RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted to the appellant with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Deepak Rai, was charged under multiple provisions of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023, the Arms Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly firing on the informant's son and his friend. The appellant contended that he was falsely implicated, noting that neither the dying declaration of the deceased nor the statement of an injured witness mentioned his name, and that a co-accused had already been granted bail. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting seven prior criminal antecedents, though the appellant was already on bail in six other cases. The Patna High Court, after considering the lack of incriminating statements against the appellant and the bail granted to a co-accused, set aside the lower court’s refusal and ordered bail with a Rs.10,000 bond and specific conditions. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the appellant was released on bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code despite the serious nature of the offences and his prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether the absence of the appellant's name in the dying declaration and witness statements negates the prosecution's case for denying bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 35
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 14(A)(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
- dying declaration
- high court
- appeal
- Section 14A
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3799 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-477 Year-2024 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Deepak Rai @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Yadav @ Indrajeet Rai S/O
Jainath Rai @ Jaynath Ray Resident of Ramjee Chak Sarkari School Gali,
P.S- Digha, District- Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sangeeta Devi W/O Late Bijendra Paswan R/O Village- Gandhi Gali Main
Road, Ramji Chak, P.S- Digha, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rahul Raj, Advocate
Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 08-04-2026 Heard Mr. Rahul Raj, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Ms. Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl.P.P. for the
State.
2. Despite valid service of notice, no one appears on
behalf of the Respondent No. 2.
3. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 24.07.2025
passed by the learned Court of I/C Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna in connection with
Special Case No. 474 of 2024 arising out of Digha P.S. Case No.
477 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 24.07.2024 registered under Sections
118. 109 and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023, Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3799 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
and 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act and later on Section 103 of the BNS, 2023 was
added.
4. According to the prosecution case, eight miscreants
riding on three motorcycles came and fired indiscriminately
upon the informant's son and his friend due to which they
sustained gunshot injuries.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in
the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the appellant has not
committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further
submits that the statement/dying declaration of the deceased,
namely, Neeraj Kumar has been recorded in paragraph no. 46 of
the case diary in which he has not stated anything about the
appellant and apart from that in paragraph no. 47 of the case
diary the statement of one Raju Kumar Rai has been recorded in
which he has also not stated anything about the appellant. He
further submits that in the dying declaration of Neeraj Kumar
the name of the co-accused Pintu Kumar has been transpired
who has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3799 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
vide order dated 11.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2092 of
2025. He further submits that the police, after investigation,
submitted charge sheet against the appellant. The appellant is in
custody since 30.05.2025.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant on the
ground that the appellant carries seven criminal antecedents
other than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in
six cases and one case is pending for consideration before the
competent court of law.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case that the deceased has not stated anything about the
appellant and even the injured person has also not stated
anything about the appellant and co-accused against whom there
is allegation of firing attributed has been granted bail by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court, let the appellant, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Court of I/C Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna in connection with
Special Case No. 474 of 2024 arising out of Digha P.S. Case No.
477 of 2024, with other following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3799 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…