Patna High Court
Rahul Singh RajputversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The court allowed the bail application, granting regular bail with conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Singh Rajput, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging that he was falsely implicated through a co‑accused's confession. The incident involved the murder of the informant's father, with the informant identifying two assailants, while the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR. The prosecution argued that the co‑accused’s confession directly implicated the petitioner and highlighted his extensive criminal history. The defence contended that the petitioner’s involvement is unsubstantiated, pointing to the lack of FIR mention and the fact that other co‑accused had already been granted bail. After considering the submissions, the court granted bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and several compliance requirements, allowing the petitioner to be released.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being implicated solely through a co‑accused's confession.
- Whether the petitioner’s extensive pending criminal cases and alleged criminal background preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- bail conditions
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- confession of co‑accused
- pending criminal cases
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70884 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2024 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Rahul Singh Rajput S/o- Mr. Shiv Bahadur Singh R/v- Chour PS- Rampur
Dist- Jaunpur (U.P.)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pramendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
learned counsel appearing for the informant and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Mali P.S. Case
No. 222 of 2024 dated 01-12-2024 registered under Sections
103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that while the
informant was traveling with his father on 30-11-2024 in a four-
wheeler near Sonaura bridge, two motorcycles on which the
accused persons were riding intercepted them. The pillion rider
of one motorcycle shot his father killing him on the spot. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70884 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
informant identified Rakesh Giri and Mantu Yadav as the
assailants and Kamlesh Mehta and Sanjay Giri were on the other
motorcycle; both drivers, wearing helmets, could not be
identified. It is further alleged that the co-accused, Rakesh Giri,
threatened the informant, who ran towards a paddy field as the
accused fired thrice at him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s name
does not appear in the First Information Report; rather, he has
been implicated only on the basis of the confessional statement
of co-accused, Rakesh Giri due to the petitioner’s past criminal
history. It is further submitted that the specific allegation of
firing on the deceased is directed only against the co-accused
Rakesh Giri and Mantu Yadav. The informant claims to be the
eyewitness of the occurrence and there is no whisper in the FIR
about three persons allegedly causing gun shot injury to the
deceased. Learned counsel further submits that one of the
principal assailant, Mantu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar, has already
been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 27.11.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 65143 of 2025. Other
co-accused, namely Sanjay Giri, Satyajit Giri, Santosh Kumar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70884 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
Yadav and Kamendra Kumar Singh, have also been granted bail
by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 16.07.2025,
30.07.2025, 12.08.2025 and 16.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. Nos. 15961
of 2025, 21742 of 2025, 32652 of 2025 and 19270 of 2025
respectively, which have been annexed as Annexure-2 series to
the bail petition. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has
been in custody since 08.05.2025 and has 31 criminal cases
pending against him, in all of which he is on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and the
Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer
and submitted that the co-accused Rakesh Giri who is the main
assailant has stated in his confession that he along with the
petitioner killed the deceased with a firearm. It is further
submitted that the petitioner is a contract killer and 31 criminal
cases are pending against him.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-IX, Aurangabad, in connection with Mali P.S. Case No.
222 of 2024, subject to the following conditions :-(i) that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70884 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly
represented on each and every date fixed 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) that one
of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father,
mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall
also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if
the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar
nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the
court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for
cancellation of bail on ground of misuse (iv) that 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 and (v) that the petitioner will appear before the SHO of
concerned PS in the first week of each month till conclusion of
the trial.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
Checking your session…