Patna High Court
Rahul Sharma @ Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Rahul Sharma sought regular bail in a case registered under section 309(4) of the B.N.S., alleging that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants who allegedly snatched a mobile, a gold ring and a house key at gunpoint. The prosecution claimed the petitioner was involved, while the petitioner’s counsel argued that the petitioner was innocent, the FIR named unknown persons, and the ring recovered was not linked to him. The petitioner had been in judicial custody since 27‑04‑2025 and had prior criminal antecedents, but those arose after the incident in question. The State opposed the bail, but the court, after considering the facts, found insufficient grounds to deny bail. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner under section 309(4) of the B.N.S. given the circumstances of the case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- regular bail
- section 309(4)
- B.N.S.
- judicial custody
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86505 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2025 Thana- Shahpur P.S. District- Nawada
======================================================
Rahul Sharma @ Rahul Kumar Son of Manoj Sharma Resident of Village-
Mafi, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under section 309(4) of
B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution is that some unknown
miscreants have snatched mobile, golden ring and key of the
house of the informant on gun point.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR was lodged
against unknown miscreants. It has been submitted that
petitioner was apprehended in Warsaliganj P.S. Case No. 216 of
2025 and in that case, house of one Amir Alam was searched. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86505 of 2025(3) dt.03-02-2026
2/2
is alleged that the petitioner was also there and from the house
of the petitioner, a ring was recovered. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has further submitted that neither the petitioner nor
the ring was put on TIP. Petitioner is having criminal antecedent
but all the antecedents are after after Warsaliganj P.S. Case No.
216 of 2025. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 27.04.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Shahpur P.S. Case No. 42 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Nawada.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…