Patna High Court
Raj Kumar Rai @ Saroj Yadav @ Sanoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court denied bail, dismissing the petitioner's application.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar Rai, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Section 109 of the B.N.S. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging that he fired a weapon that injured a boy's leg. He applied for regular bail, claiming innocence and alleging false implication and compromise. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charge. The court noted the direct allegation of firing and the petitioner’s alleged tampering with evidence, and consequently refused to grant bail. The bail application was dismissed, with the court clarifying that its observations were prima facie and not a determination on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Section 109 of the B.N.S. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether alleged tampering with evidence justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- Arms Act
- B.N.S.
- Section 109
- Section 27
- evidence tampering
- high court
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39679 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2025 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Raj Kumar Rai @ Saroj Yadav @ Sanoj Kumar S/o Jaddu Rai @ Jaddu Ray
Resident of Village - Hamam, Par, Sidhi Ghat, Diwan Mohalla, P.S.-
Khajekalan, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Chaudhary, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 22-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Alamganj P.S. Case No. 506 of 2025 registered for the offence
under Section 109 of the B.N.S. read with Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
accused of firing, which hit the leg of a boy.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has falsely been
implicated and the parties have compromised the case. The
petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2026 having five criminal
antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39679 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
2/2
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the direct allegation of firing against
the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is tampering with
the evidences, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.