Patna High Court
Deodas @ Raj Kumar @ Raja Babu @ Deodas KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Deodas, was arrested on 6 April 2026 in connection with FIR dated 11 October 2025 alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, along with others, surrounded an informant, abused him and fired at him, rendering the informant unconscious. The petitioner contended that the FIR contains no specific allegation against him and that the charges are fabricated, seeking bail. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s alleged participation in the crime and his prior criminal antecedents. The High Court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether the absence of a specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify refusal of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 308(2), 308(3), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39359 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Deodas @ Raj Kumar @ Raja Babu @ Deodas Kumar Son of Ramesh Ram
Resident of Village- Nawadih, P.S.- Akodhigola, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratnakar (App 125)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard Mr. Ravi Kant, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
06.04.2026 in connection with Akodhigola P.S. Case No. 400 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 11.10.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 308(2), 308(3), 352,
351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of
Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
accused persons are alleged to have surrounded the informant,
abused him and shot fire on him due to which the informant
became unconscious.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39359 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is
false and fabricated. From bare perusal of the FIR it appears that
FIR is in two parts, in first part there is general and omnibus
allegation against all the accused persons including the
petitioner and in the second part there is specific allegation
against co-accused, namely, Saroj and Dhiraj that they have
fired upon the informant and as far as this petitioner is
concerned, there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act
against him. The petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has participated in the present crime
in question and apart from that he carries two criminal
antecedents in which he is on bail in one case and one case is
pending for consideration before competent Court of law.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with
Akodhigola P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, subject to the following
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39359 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.