Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rajendra JhaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail as the primary allegation of firing rests on co‑accused and there is no substantive proof of his participation.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajendra Jha, applied for regular bail in a case registered under sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged that co‑accused Krishna Jha and Badal Jha fired at the informant, causing injury, while also alleging that the petitioner repeatedly assaulted the informant. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and had no prior criminal record, having been in custody since 26‑11‑2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the direct allegation against the petitioner of assault. After hearing both sides, the court noted that the firing allegation rested on the other co‑accused and that the petitioner had been detained for an extended period without proven involvement. Consequently, the court ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act despite allegations in the FIR.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • false implication
  • criminal procedure
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12378 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- BOKHRA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Rajendra Jha S/o Late Dayanand Jha @ Late Gunand Jha R/o village-
                 Budhnagra, PS- Bokhara, District- Sitamarhi
                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar                          ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Shamir Mehra, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
                                                  Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Md. Mobassar Ali, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-02-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Bokhra P.S. Case no.197

                   of 2025 registered under sections 109 and 3 (5) of the Bhartiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that the five named accused persons including the petitioner

                   herein have been causing trouble to the informant since last

                   several months. It is further stated that on the date of

                   occurrence, co-accused Krishna Jha and Badal Jha resorted to

                   firing as a result of which the informant sustained firearm injury.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Accepting the

                   allegations levelled in the FIR for the sake of argument, the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12378 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       allegation of firing is on the two other co-accused and not the

                       petitioner herein. The petitioner is in custody since 26.11.2025

                       and has no criminal antecedent.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P

                       for the State and learned counsel for the informant. It is

                       submitted by learned counsel for the informant that not only the

                       petitioner is named in the FIR but there is direct allegation

                       against him of repeatedly assaulting the informant and others.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the

                       allegation of firing upon the informant being on the other two

                       co-accused and not the petitioner herein together with the

                       petitioner having remained in custody since 26.11.2025, the

                       petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with

                       Bokhra P.S. Case no.197 of 2025 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 Sub-Divisional

                       Judicial Magistrate, Pupri, District-Sitamarhi.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-

U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.