Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9930/2026bail granted

Hare Ram Kumar @ Hari Om v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-06Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9930 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2025 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Hare Ram Kumar @ Hari Om S/O Awadhesh Singh @ Awadhesh Sharma @ Bhutali Sharma R/O Choti Tangrela, P.s.- Naubatpur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.03.2025, in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 13.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 132, 126(2), 109, 3(5) of the B.N.S and Section 25(1-B), 26, 35, 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused fired in front of the house of Sadanand Rai and three persons sustained injuries and one country made loaded pistol containing five live cartridges and four live cartridges in another magazine were recovered from his possession.

2/4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that the petitioner was also accused in Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025 under Sections 103(1) of the B.N.S. and other Sections of the B.N.S. and from perusal of the F.I.R. which is produced by the petitioner in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025 which suggests that the petitioner was main accused in the aforesaid case i.e. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025 and the eye witness (injured person) has clearly stated that the petitioner has fired upon the deceased and the present F.I.R. was instituted in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No.

167 of 2025 and it appears from the seizure list that one country made pistol and nine live cartridges and two pieces pistol magazine were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the seizure list was prepared but from perusal of the seizure list which suggests that the recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner but there was no sign on the seizure list of the petitioner. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.03.2025.

3/4

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM-VI, Danapur, Patna in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) 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.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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

4/4 criminal antecedents, 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) Ibrar//- U T