Patna High Court

Bhushan Shama @ Bipin Singh @ BipinversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 1 May 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to regular bail as the allegations are general, no specific evidence links him, and similar co‑accused have been granted bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Bhushan Shama, was implicated in a Naxalite attack on a construction site, charged with multiple IPC offences, a provision of the Arms Act and the CLA Act. He claimed innocence, arguing that the FIR was vague and that a co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing six prior criminal cases. The Court examined the lack of specific evidence linking the petitioner, the prolonged pre‑trial custody since February 2024, and the precedent of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused. Accordingly, the Court ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the charges and his criminal antecedents
Whether the general and omnibus nature of the FIR and lack of specific evidence justify granting bail
Whether the duration of pre‑trial detention warrants bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
CLA Act — s. 17
Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 120.5, 147, 149, 384, 386, 387, 427, 431, 436, 447, 461, 504, 506, 509

Subjects

regular bail
Naxalite
IPC offences
Arms Act
Criminal Law Amendment Act
judicial custody
criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25287 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-407 Year-2017 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Bhushan Shama @ Bipin Singh @ Bipin, S/o Late Ragho Singh @ Radho
                 Singh, Resident of Village- Chabura, P.S.- Anti, Dist.- Gaya

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Arun Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-05-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections, 147, 149,

                   384, 386, 387, 504, 506, 509, 431, 427, 447, 461, 436 and 120B

                   of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section

                   17 of CLA Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that altogether 20-25

                   members of naxalite group arrived at the construction site of the

                   informant whereafter, they had set on fire the bamboos kept there

                   as also had taken out the cement sacks and spilled the same in the

                   field.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has

                   falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25287 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
                                                         2/2




                       petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear

                       that the nature of allegation is general and omnibus and there is no

                       source of knowledge of the informant’s munshi who has named

                       this petitioner. It has further been submitted that similarly situated

                       co-accused Vimlesh Yadav has already been granted bail by this

                       Court vide order dated 17.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 86239

                       of 2025. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

                       since 23.02.2024..

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the prayer of regular bail and has submitted that petitioner

                       is having criminal antecedent of six cases.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is

                       inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                       petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with

                       Tekari P.S. Case No. 407 of 2017 on furnishing bail bond of

                       Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                       each to the satisfaction of learned Court of District and Additional

                       Sessions Judge-XVII, Gaya.


                                                        (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…