Patna High Court
Rajnish Gupta @ Rajnish Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The petition for quashing the order of cognizance was dismissed, and the order of cognizance stands.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajnish Gupta, filed a petition seeking to quash the order of cognizance dated 08‑04‑2024 issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar, in a murder case (Sections 302, 120B, 34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act). The prosecution alleged that on 04‑07‑2019 the victim, Rajnarayan Singh, was shot dead by co‑accused Mulayam Yadav, and that the petitioner was present on a motorcycle at the scene and was part of the alleged unlawful assembly. The petitioner argued that there was no direct allegation against him for the killing, that the charge was based merely on suspicion and past enmity, and that he had no criminal antecedents. The State contended that the petitioner was named in the FIR, was a member of the unlawful assembly, and that sufficient material existed to sustain the cognizance. The High Court held that the petition was devoid of merit, as the petitioner’s alleged presence and participation justified the cognizance, and dismissed the application for quashing.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate standard for granting a quash of an order taking cognizance when the accused is only alleged to have been present at the scene?
- Whether mere presence and alleged participation in an unlawful assembly, as alleged in the FIR, suffice to sustain cognizance under Sections 302 IPC and 27 Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34
Subjects
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- unlawful assembly
- Arms Act
- quash petition
- cognizance
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15658 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2019 Thana- BUXAR MUFFSIL District- Buxar
======================================================
Rajnish Gupta @ Rajnish Kumar Gupta S/O- Birendra Sah Village- Parasarha
Ps- Itarhi Dist- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pankaj Kumar Singh S/o- Late Birendra Singh Village- Parasarha Ps- Itarhi
Dist- Buxar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dimpal Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order
taking cognizance dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in connection with Mufassil P.S.
Case No. 186 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 302, 120B
and 34 of I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant, namely,
Pankaj Kumar Singh alleged that on 04-07-2019 at about 6:30
A.M., his brother Rajnarayan Singh @ Pintu Singh and Munna
Kumar Singh left for Buxar on his motorcycle bearing
Registration. No. BR-44B-5077 driven by Rajnarayan Singh @
Pintu Singh and Munna Kumar Singh was pillion rider.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15658 of 2025(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/4
Rajnarayan Singh @ Pintu Singh was a contractor and was
doing some work at Central Jail, Buxar. When both of them
reached at Unwao-Bhabhuar Wala More at around 6.40 PM,
suddenly petitioner and co-accused persons ridden on two
motorcycles came and surrounded the informant’s brothers. It is
alleged that the co-accused Mulayam Yadav shot his brother
Rajnarayan Singh @ Pintu Singh on his head due to which he
died on the spot. Thereafter, all the accused persons fled away
from the place of occurrence. It is further alleged that Virendra
Sah, Bhagwan Sah, Chandan Yadav and Vikash Yadav are
involved in this occurrence because his cousin brother
Rajnarayan Singh @ Pintu Singh has appeared as a witness in a
case lodged by his cousin brother against Birendra Sah and
Bhagwan Sah vide Itarhi P.S. Case No. 69/2012 in which his
brother Rajnarayan Singh @ Pintu Singh (deceased) was the
main Pairvikar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that there is no direct allegation against the petitioner for killing
the brother of the informant rather the specific allegation of
firing upon deceased is against co-accused Mulayam Yadav and
the allegation against the petitioner is that he was also there on a
motorcycle. It has been further submitted that merely on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15658 of 2025(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/4
suspicion and due to previous enmity, the petitioner has been
made accused in this case, while petitioner has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that the petitioner and informant are villagers and
there is long standing enmity between them and on perusal of
the fardbyan itself, it is not clear whether the criminals fired
upon the deceased from front or back, the fact that how the
victim was killed and from perusal of the fardbyan the suspicion
has been raised against the petitioner as due to previous enmity
regarding Itarhi P.S. Case No. 69 of 2012 in which the deceased
was main pairvikar.
5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for quashing the cognizance order and has submitted
that petitioner is named in the FIR. He was a member of
unlawful assembly to kill the deceased. Moreover, the grounds
raised in this petition and also the arguments advanced by
learned counsel for petitioner, it may be a case of defence, there
are sufficient materials against the petitioner and hence the
impugned order does not warrant interference.
6. Considering the case to be under Section 302 IPC
and under Section 27 of Arms Act and petitioner was found
alleged to be present at the place of occurrence along with other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15658 of 2025(2) dt.31-03-2026
4/4
co-accused persons, pursuant to which the deceased was killed,
this quashing application is devoid of merits and is accordingly
dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.