Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail, subject to bond and conditions, as the allegations do not preclude bail.
Summary
Raushan Kumar, now 19 but a minor when the FIR was lodged in 2023, sought pre‑arrest bail for offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 307, 504, 506, 34 and Arms Act section 27. The FIR alleged that he, along with co‑accused, fired at an informant, assaulted the informant with the butt of a pistol, and stole jewellery from the informant's mother. The petitioner argued that he was a minor at the time, has a clean antecedent, and the injury was simple, thus warranting bail. The State opposed, contending his participation in the assault precludes bail. The Court, noting his minority at the time of the alleged act, clean record, and the non‑vital nature of the injury, granted pre‑arrest bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, directing the district court to verify any other criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether a person who was a minor at the time of the alleged offence is entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences (including attempted murder, assault, theft and arms offences) bars the grant of bail.
- Whether a clean antecedent and the nature of the injury justify the grant of pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether bail can be conditioned under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 354, 379, 504, 506
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- minority
- IPC offences
- Arms Act
- clean antecedent
- Bihar High Court
- Section 482(2) CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2823 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-957 Year-2023 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
Raushan Kumar, Male, aged about 19 years, son of Shivshankar Kumar @
Shiv Shankar Kumar @ shivshankar Yadav Resident of Village- Manjhauli,
Post -Makhdumpur, PS- Tankuppa, District -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhu Prasun, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard Mr. Madhu Prasun, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 957 / 2023 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections
341/323/379/354/307/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, which was
lodged on 07.09.2023, the petitioner along with other co-
accused had allegedly fired upon the informant with an intention
to kill. When the mother of the informant came to his rescue,
then the accused persons misbehaved with her and also snatched
the gold chain and earring from her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that at the time the FIR was lodged in 2023,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2823 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
the petitioner was a minor. As such, there was no occasion for
the petitioner to be apprehended, and consequently, he did not
avail appropriate remedy. Learned counsel further submitted
that the petitioner is neighbour of the informant and due to
admitted enmity between them, the petitioner has been roped in
the present FIR on the basis of false accusation. Petitioner has
clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioner seeks to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail and submitted that, although
the specific allegation of firing upon the informant is attributed
to co-accused Rahul Kumar, the petitioner had also participated
in the alleged offence by assaulting the informant by butt of the
pistol and, as such, the petitioner don’t deserve to be released on
pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR, presently, the petitioner is 19 years old as
would appear from the cause title of the present bail application
and as such he was minor when the FIR was lodged in the year
2023. Allegation against the petitioner is that he had assaulted
by means of butt of pistol to the informant, however, as per the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2823 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
opinion of the doctor, the injury sustained by the informant is
simple in nature and same is not on the vital part of the body. I
am of the opinion that the petitioner, who is having clean
antecedent, has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on
pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya /
Concerned Court in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 957
/ 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the
petitioner is involved in some other cases, as what has been
stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…