Patna High Court
Raja Kumar @ Raja PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail is denied to the petitioner at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Raja Kumar, sought bail in a case involving alleged offences of dacoity, attempt to murder, and illegal possession of arms, based on an FIR where his name appeared only through a co-accused's confessional statement. He contended that he was falsely implicated and that the co-accused's statement lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s alleged involvement in firing at the informant and his nine prior criminal convictions. The Court, considering the seriousness of the offences, the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, and the circumstances of the case, refused to grant bail at this stage. The trial court was directed to expedite the trial, and the petitioner was allowed to renew a bail application after six months if the trial remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offences (IPC 394, 307, 411 and Arms Act 27) and his criminal antecedents.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co-accused is sufficient to implicate the petitioner for the purpose of bail.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of tampering with evidence or influencing the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 394, 411
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- dacoity
- attempt to murder
- false implication
- criminal antecedents
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48324 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2023 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Raja Kumar @ Raja Pandit S/o Bablu Jha @ Rajesh Kumar Jha R/o Village-
Shubhai, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shivjee Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
6 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Hajipur
Sadar P.S. case No. 154 of 2023 instituted for the offences under
Sections 394, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on the alleged
date and time of occurrence, three unknown miscreants
intercepted the informant and one of them fired upon him and
the bullet hit him on his belly. In the meantime, one of the
miscreants snatched the mobile phone of the informant and the
other miscreants took his Scooty and fled away. It is further
alleged that during the course of fleeing away one miscreant
fired which hit on the leg of the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48324 of 2025(6) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Petitioner is not named in the FIR rather his name has transpired
on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Uttam
Kumar, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law.
Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case under Sections
394, 307, 411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that other co-accused has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 935 of 2024. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2024 and
has nine criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further
submitted that on perusal of the case diary it appears that
petitioner has fired, which hit on the leg of the informant. He
further submits that petitioner has nine criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48324 of 2025(6) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
9. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to
renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the
trial is not concluded within a period of six months from today.
If any such application is filed before the learned court below,
the court concerned shall consider the same on its own merit
without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…