Patna High Court
Raushan Kumar @ DavidversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar (alias David), was charged under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly assaulting an informant’s brother and firing a pistol at the informant, causing a gunshot injury. He had been in custody since September 2025 and had two prior criminal antecedents. The petitioner sought bail after an earlier anticipatory bail application was rejected. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the direct allegation of firing a weapon and the seriousness of the offences. The High Court, after considering the facts, declined to grant bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing the petitioner to renew the bail application if the trial is not concluded within three months of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in light of the serious nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
- Whether the prior criminal antecedents and the direct allegation of firing a pistol preclude the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- assault
- firearms
- anticipatory bail
- trial expeditious
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7969 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-795 Year-2024 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Raushan Kumar @ David Son of Sri Niranjan Ray R/v- Panapur Diara, P.S.-
Akilpur, Distt.- Patna at present resident of village - Ramjichak Bataganj,
Gandhi Gali, P.S.- Digha, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Digha
P.S. Case No. 795 of 2024 instituted for the offence under
Sections 109 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Section 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier vide order dated 28.07.2025,
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20661 of 2025, anticipatory bail of the
petitioner was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
31.10.2024 the accused persons assaulted the informant’s
younger brother over a dispute relating to a motorcycle key and
later extended threats. On 01.11.2024, petitioner allegedly fired
upon the informant with a pistol during the assault, causing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7969 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
gunshot injury.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 18.09.2025. Petitioner
bears two criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from
perusal of the FIR, it would reveal that petitioner alleged fired
upon the informant, due to which he sustained gun shot injury. It
is next submitted that nothing has been recovered from the
possession of the petitioner. Charge sheet has already been
submitted in this case.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, there being direct allegation against the petitioner of
firing upon the informant due to which he sustained gun shot
injury, this Court, at this stage, is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is hereby
rejected.
8. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7969 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and
unnecessary adjournments.
9. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of
three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of
this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…