Patna High Court
Sanjay Singh Bhokta @ Sanjay SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the bail application, subject to verification that the charges against the petitioner have been framed.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Singh Bhokta, was arrested in connection with a raid on 2-11-2018 during which extremists allegedly fired at police, resulting in the seizure of arms and ammunition but no injuries. He has been in custody since 24-07-2025 and faces charges under multiple provisions of the IPC, Arms Act, Explosive Substances Act and the U.A.P. Act, with the charge sheet reportedly framed on 30-10-2025. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that co‑accused have already been released on bail and that his case is similar. The State opposed bail, contending that the charge sheet had not been placed on record. The High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that bail be granted on the condition that the trial court first verify that the charges have indeed been framed, and imposed a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties. The order also warned that bail could be cancelled if the petitioner attempts to delay the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the alleged absence of the charge sheet on record
- Whether the framing of charges on 30-10-2025 suffices to justify bail
- Whether the bail granted to co‑accused influences the decision in the present case
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
- Explosive Substances Act — s. 3, 4, 5
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 147, 148, 307, 353, 504, 506
- U.A.P. Act — s. 16, 18, 20
Subjects
- bail
- IPC offences
- Arms Act
- Explosive Substances Act
- charge framing
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24457 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2018 Thana- DUMARIYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Sanjay Singh Bhokta @ Sanjay Singh Son of Shivlochan Singh Bhokta @
Shivlochan Singh R/O Village- Chhakarbandha, P.S.- Dumaria, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 353, 504,
506, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27,
35 of the Arms Act, Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substances
Act and Sections 16, 18, 20 of U.A.P. Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is in custody since 24.07.2025 and has antecedent
of one case. It is further submitted that informant alleges that
police force along with the Kobra Force conducted raid against
the extremists on 03.11.2018 when the extremists started firing
at the force and the force retaliated as such the extremists
leaving arms, ammunitions, solar plate and other articles as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24457 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
detailed in the FIR.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the date of occurrence is 02.11.2018 and the seizure was made
on 03.11.2018 and FIR thereafter came to be instituted on
08.11.2018 against 40 named accused persons including the
petitioner. It is next submitted that though it is alleged that
extremists resorted to firing but then no one was injured. It is
also submitted that similarly situated co-accused have been
granted the privilege of bail by the learned District Court itself
as would manifest from P/2 Series. It is also submitted that
Sharwan Yadav had approached this Court seeking regular bail
by filing Cr. Misc. No.9585 of 2026 and the same came to be
allowed by an order dated 04.05.2026 on the ground that
charges against him was framed. It is submitted that charges
against the petitioner also stands framed by an order dated
30.10.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application and
submits that though it is submitted that charges against the
petitioner stands framed but then the order framing of charge
has not been brought on record.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24457 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is
pending in connection with Dumaria P. S. Case No.55 of 2018.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court before
releasing the petitioner on bail shall verify whether charges
against the petitioner has been framed or not if it is found that
charges against the petitioner has not been framed in that event
the present order shall not be given effect to, but if it is found
that charges against the petitioner stands framed then petitioner
will be released forthwith.
9. It is further made clear that if the learned trial court
comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying
the delay the trial of the case in any manner the learned trial
court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.