Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pappu Rai @ Pappu Kumar RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond and sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Pappu Rai, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 569 of 2025, which alleged offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that three co‑accused fired weapons during a dispute, causing injuries and the death of one person, but did not specifically allege that the petitioner fired. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and that no specific charge of firing was made against him. The State opposed the bail. After reviewing the FIR and noting that the firing allegation was directed only at the three co‑accused, the Court granted anticipatory bail, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties of the same amount, to be filed within four weeks.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner when the FIR does not specifically allege his participation in the firing?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • firearms
  • arms act
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3699 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Pappu Rai @ Pappu Kumar Ray S/O Late Manish Rai Resident of Village-
                 Brahmpur, Nayka Tola, Police Station- Bhagwan Bazar, District- Saran
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   28-01-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                   2. The petitioner in this application prays for bail

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhagwan Bazar P.S.

                   Case no.569 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under

                   sections 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2)

                   and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27

                   of the Arms Act.

                                    3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that over a trivial dispute relating to the game of cricket between

                   the children, the eight named accused persons including the

                   petitioner herein came variously armed. As a result of firing

                   resorted to by Ekbal Rai, Narayan Rai and Raju Rai, several

                   persons sustained firearm injuries and subsequently in course of

                   treatment, five days later, Raju Rai of the informant’s side died.

                                    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3699 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. So far as

                      the petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of firing

                      against him. The same is specific on the above named three co-

                      accused. The allegation against the petitioner at best is general

                      and omnibus in nature. He undertakes to cooperate in the

                      investigation/trial.

                                       5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

                      A.P.P. for the State.

                                     6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                      having perused the contents of the FIR, taking into

                      consideration the allegation of firing being specific on Ekbal

                      Rai, Narayan Rai and Raju Rai and not the petitioner herein, it is

                      directed that the petitioner, above named, in the event of his

                      arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a

                      period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in

                      connection with Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case no.569 of 2025 on

                      furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with

                      two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                      learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Chapra, Saran.


                                                  (Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.