Patna High Court
Shivlochan Rai @ Lusi RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Shivlochan Rai was charged with murder under Section 396 of the IPC and illegal possession of arms under Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising from an incident on 2 September 2022. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the FIR was delayed, that he was not present at the scene, and that witness statements were inconsistent. The State and the informant opposed bail, citing direct allegations that the petitioner fired at the victim, corroborated by the post‑mortem report, and highlighting the petitioner's extensive prior criminal record. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the credibility of the evidence, and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. Concluding that the allegations were substantiated and the petitioner posed a flight and tampering risk, the court denied bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 396 IPC and 27 Arms Act given the seriousness of the offences and prior criminal record.
- Whether the delay in filing and receipt of the FIR warrants bail.
- Whether the direct allegation of firing and supporting post‑mortem evidence justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161
- Indian Penal Code — s. 396
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- dacoity
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
- FIR delay
- post‑mortem evidence
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32517 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2022 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Shivlochan Rai @ Lusi Rai Son of Ram Sharan Rai Resident of Village
-Banhara P S -Teghra District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Dixit, Adv.
Ms. Shruti, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP
For the Informant Mr. Eashita Raj, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
9 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Naresh Dixit, learned counsel for the
petitioner assisted by Ms. Shruti and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 396 of the IPC and Section
27 of the Arms Act.
3. Petitioner along with other accused persons are said
to have committed murder of the son of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted, at
the outset, that for an occurrence which took place on
02.09.2022, the FIR was lodged on 03.09.2022 and the same
was received in the Court of the C.J.M. on 05.09.2022 which is
indicative of the fact that delay has been caused in the receipt of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32517 of 2025(9) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
the FIR in the court which speaks volumes about the false
implication of the petitioner as there is all possibility of being
antedated. It is further submitted that the allegation of firing the
first shot is at Sushil Rai and thereafter the petitioner is also
supposed to have fired but as a matter of fact, the petitioner was
not present at the place of occurrence and there have been
substantial diversion in the statement of the informant and other
witnesses with regard to the manner of occurrence from the First
Information Report to their statement recorded under Section
161 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2023
and the case has only been committed to the court of Sessions.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have opposed the application for bail. Learned
counsel for the informant has submitted that there is specific and
direct allegation of firing at the petitioner and the postmortem
report also corroborates the firearm injury received by the
deceased. The informant and one other witness has also got
injured in the occurrence whose statement has also been
recorded in the case diary and the same is also supportive of the
allegations. Further, the petitioner has several criminal
antecedents and most of them are of serious offences.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32517 of 2025(9) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
circumstances and also considering the fact that there is direct
allegation of firing on the petitioner and the petitioner also has a
long history of criminal cases against him, I am not inclined to
enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his
prayer for bail is rejected in connection Teghra P.S. Case No.
253 of 2022.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…