Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raju MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

Raju Mukhiya was charged under the Arms Act, NDPS Act and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for possession of two loaded pistols and 20 bottles of cough syrup. He had previously been granted bail, which was cancelled after he was declared an absconder and imprisoned in another case. The petitioner applied for fresh bail, acknowledging five prior criminal antecedents and offering to comply with any conditions. The State opposed the bail, citing the earlier cancellation and risk of tampering. The Court, after considering the petitioner’s undertaking and the period of custody, granted bail on a cash bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to four conditions relating to family surety, appearance, non‑tampering and non‑commission of similar offences.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to a petitioner who previously had bail cancelled for absconding and imprisonment in another case
  • Whether the nature of the offences under the Arms Act, NDPS Act and Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act precludes bail
  • Whether the petitioner’s undertaking and custody period justify the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • NDPS Act
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • criminal procedure
  • absconding
  • prior bail cancellation
  • conditions of bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22500 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-895 Year-2023 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Raju Mukhiya Son of Late Bhagvat Mukhiya Resident of Village- Bhirki,
                 Ward No. 10, P.S.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura


                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mrs. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Madhepura P.S. Case No. 895 of 2023, instituted for the

                   offences under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act,

                   read with Sections 21(c), 22(c) of the NDPS Act and Section

                   30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that total two loaded

                   country made pistols have been recovered from the possession

                   of the petitioner and co-accused person. It is further alleged that

                   there is also recovery of 20 bottles of Wiscof cough syrup

                   containing 100 ml each from a Scorpio vehicle.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22500 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                            2/3




                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

          present case is the case of misuse of privilege of bail earlier

          granted to the petitioner. Earlier the petitioner was granted bail

          on by the learned court below. It is further submitted that on

          26.06.2024 the bail bonds of the petitioner was cancelled as the

          petitioner was imprisoned in another case due to which the

          petitioner was unable to appear in this case and further the

          petitioner was declared absconder on 19.04.2025 and an order

          for permanent warrant was passed. It has been submitted on

          behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since

          02.03.2025 and has got five criminal antecedents. Learned

          counsel further submitted that petitioner undertakes to abide by

          any conditions imposed by this Court, if released on bail.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, the undertaking given by the petitioner as also the

          period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is

          inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                       7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22500 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       below/concerned Court             in connection with Madhepura P.S.

                       Case No. 895 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:

                                     (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of

                       the family of the petitioner.

                                     (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                       fixed at the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive

                       dates without sufficient cause.

                                     (III) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence

                       or the witnesses during the trial.

                                     (IV) Petitioner shall not commit offence of similar

                       nature in future.

                                     If any of the above conditions are violated, the Trial

                       Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the

                       petitioner.



                                                                   (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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