Rakesh Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4997 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2024 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Rakesh Giri S/O Janardan Giri R/O Vill.- Ankhoraha, P.S- NTPC khaira, Dist.- Aurgangabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rahul Rathour For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mali P.S. Case No.222 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 130(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of 14 cases and is in custody since 05.05.2025 and the informant alleges that petitioner fired causing firearm injury on head of his father, while they were coming back from Aurangabad by car and informant identified the petitioner as assailant and also identified Mantu, Kamlesh and Sanjay but was not able to identify other two accused who

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4997 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/2 were wearing helmet, thereafter he informed his uncle, who came with villagers and the dead body was brought home.

4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that trial has commenced and witnesses are being examined. It is also submitted that specific allegation of firing is against the petitioner. It is next submitted that why a son would lie that his father was killed by petitioner had petitioner not been the assailant. It is also submitted that if privilege of bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond or try to tamper with the evidence. It is further submitted that petitioner has antecedent of 14 serious cases.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is not in a position to rebut the said submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant that trial has commenced and witnesses are being examined.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

7. The bail application of the petitioner is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T