Patna High Court
Santosh Kewat @ Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Kewat, was arrested in connection with a land‑dispute incident in which ten accused allegedly fired weapons, injuring two persons. The prosecution alleged that the incident was aimed at taking possession of disputed land, charging the petitioner under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, noting that the FIR indicated the property dispute was between two other individuals and no specific overt act was ascribed to him. The court observed that the allegations were general, the dispute did not involve the petitioner, and he had been in custody since 24‑12‑2025, warranting consideration of bail. Accordingly, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act, 1959?
- Whether the FIR contains specific allegations against the petitioner sufficient to deny bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 111, 126(2), 192, 3(5), 467
Subjects
- regular bail
- land dispute
- false implication
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14159 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2025 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Santosh Kewat @ Santosh Kumar Sahni Son of Rajesh Kewat Residence of
Brajesh Nagar, P.S.- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Punit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case
no.348 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 109, 111, 467,
192 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section
27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, as a result of land
dispute between Ejaj Mainpuri and Parwez Alam, it is stated
that 10 named accused persons including the petitioner herein as
also 5-7 unknown came and resorted to firing as a result of
which two persons were injured. The assault was with the
intention of taking possession of the disputed land.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. From the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14159 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/2
contents of the FIR itself, it would transpire that so far as the
dispute with respect to the immovable properties is concerned, it
is between two others and not the petitioner herein. No specific
overt act has been alleged against the petitioner who is in
custody since 24.12.2025. He has been falsely implicated in the
case because of his antecedent and undertakes to cooperate in
the investigation/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P.
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the dispute
with respect to the immovable properties being between two
other persons and not the petitioner herein, the allegations being
general and omnibus in nature and the petitioner having
remained in custody since 24.12.2025, the Court directs the
petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Buniyadganj
P.S. Case no.348 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 Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate VIII, Gaya.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.