Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rajesh Kumar @ Nakat Gop @ Nakat Rai @ Rajesh GopversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The Court denied bail, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to release at this stage.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 307, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. This was his third attempt to obtain bail, having previously filed a bail petition (Cr. Misc No. 88602 of 2024) which was rejected on 9‑May‑2025. The learned senior counsel argued that the petitioner should be released on bail, but the Court examined the earlier order and found no justification to grant bail at this stage. The Court noted that the petitioner remains in custody pending the framing of charges. Consequently, the bail prayer was denied, though the petitioner was permitted to renew the application after charge framing.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Sections 307, 34, 120B IPC and Section 27 Arms Act pending framing of charge

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Arms Act
  • regular bail
  • charge framing
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81415 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-293 Year-2024 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Kumar @ Nakat Gop @ Nakat Rai @ Rajesh Gop Son of Late Jay
                 Ram Ray @ Late Jairam Rai @ Late Jai Gope Resident of Mitanchak Brajesh
                 Singh Ke Makan me Kirayedar, P.S.- Sampatchak, District - Patna, permanent
                 address - Patipul Digha, P.S.- Digha, District - Patna.

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv
                                                   Mr.Sunil Prasad Singh, Adv
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms.Rita Verma
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-02-2026               1.     Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.     The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Digha

                   PS Case No. 293 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 307, 34, 120B of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms

                   Act.

                             3.     Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits

                   that this is the third attempt of the petitioner to seek regular bail.

                   It is next submitted that petitioner had earlier moved before this

                   Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 88602 of 2024

                   and the same came to be rejected by an order dated 9-5-2025.

                             4.     The Court has perused the order dated 9-5-2025 in
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81415 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026
                                                          2/2




                        Cr. Misc No. 88602 of 2024, as such is not inclined to release

                        the petitioner on bail.

                                 5.     Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is

                        rejected.

                                 6.     However, the petitioner would be at liberty to

                        renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.