Patna High Court
Niraj 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 conditions, as the medical evidence does not substantiate the charges.
Summary
Niraj Kumar was arrested on 9 June 2025 for alleged firing on an informant under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution claimed he caused injuries, but the medical report showed only minor lacerations that could be caused by a firearm and did not corroborate the FIR allegations. The petitioner argued he was falsely implicated due to a prior dispute and highlighted the lack of supporting medical evidence. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal antecedent. The court examined the evidence, found the medical report insufficient to sustain the charge, and ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and specific conditions, including cooperation with trial and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offences and the evidence presented
- Whether the medical injury report undermines the prosecution's case of firing on the informant
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- medical evidence
- prior criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78042 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- SHYAMPUR BHATHAN District-
Sheohar
======================================================
Niraj Kumar Son of Anil Singh R/o Village- Bhathan, P.S.- Shyampur Bhatha,
District- Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
: Ms. Divya Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 Heard Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, learned
counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Madhura Nand Jha,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
09.06.2025 in connection with Shyampur Bhathan P.S. Case No.
67 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 13.05.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 109 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and
Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the
petitioner along with other co-accused person fired upon the
informant due to which he sustained injury and later taken to
Community Health Center, Madhubani for treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Due to some previous dispute the petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78042 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
falsely been implicated in the present case. Although there is
specific allegation against the petitioner that he fired upon the
informant but the injury report of the injured person does not
support the allegation in the FIR. The injury report of the
informant is produced hereinbelow:-
1. Lacerated wound one at anterior left
leg(1.25x1)cm.
2. Lacerated wound anterolateral left leg(2x1)cm.
3. Pain and swelling left leg.
Caused by:- (1)(2)(3)-May be caused by firearm
injury
Nature of Injury:-(1)(2)(3) Simple
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet
and the petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2025.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other
than the present one.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
medical evidence does not support the case of the prosecution,
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 Additional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78042 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Sheohar in connection with
Shyampur Bhathan P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025, subject to the
following 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…