Amir RaiversusThe State of Bihar

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                          CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30902 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2024 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
             ======================================================
             Amir Rai Son of Kitab Ray @ Kitab Rai R/o Village - Bindgama, P.S.-
             Doriganj, District - Saran.

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

                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
             ======================================================
             Appearance :
             For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
                                              Mr. Madhukar Anand, Advocate
             For the State           :        Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
             For the Informant       :        Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate

             ======================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                   ORAL ORDER

5   01-07-2026                1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                              2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                 grant of regular bail in connection with Doriganj P.S. Case

                 no. 265 of 2024 registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5)

                 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of Arms

                 Act.

                              3. As per the prosecution case, the informant

                 states that while he had accompanied his elder brother to

                 ease himself on the river side, the accused persons

                 gathered there including the petitioner herein were armed

                 with rifle etc. It is stated that Rahul Rai and the petitioner

                 resorted to indiscriminate firing with their rifle on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30902 of 2026(5) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/3




           informant's brother as a result of which he died on the spot

           itself. On hulla being raised, the co-villagers gathered. The

           dead body of the informant's brother was taken for

           postmortem examination by the police.

                        4. It is submitted by learned Senior counsel

           appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has been

           falsely implicated in the case. The informant is not an

           eyewitness to the occurrence and the manner of

           occurrences is other than what has been narrated in the

           F.I.R. Referring to the independent witnesses whose

           statements have been recorded in course of investigation

           including that in paragraph no. 14 of the case diary as also

           the statements of Shankar Rai and Santosh, it is stated that

           the witnesses had seen the dead body being brought on

           boat by another brother of the informant. Thus the manner

           of occurrence is other than what has been narrated in the

           F.I.R. The postmortem report does not support the

           prosecution case and the petitioner is in custody since

           10.3.2026. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case.

                        5. The application for bail is opposed by the

           learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30902 of 2026(5) dt.01-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                       informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that

                       besides being named in the FIR, the petitioner along with

                       Rahul Rai are the main assailants of the deceased.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties,

                       and taking into consideration the allegation against the

                       petitioner in the FIR wherein the petitioner along with co-

                       accused Rahul Rai are said to have resorted to

                       indiscriminate firing with their rifle leading to the death of

                       the informant's brother, the Court is not inclined to enlarge

                       the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.



                                                  (Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash/-

U      T