Rajan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24295 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- MAHESHKHUNT District- Khagaria ====================================================== Rajan Kumar Son of Ajay Yadav Resident of Village and P.O.- Usari, P.S.- Gogri, District - Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Saurav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 126(2), 317(2) and 61(2) of the BNS as well as Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and is in custody since 01.12.2025 and the informant alleges that eight accused persons on three motorcycles came and stopped the Toto and, on point of gun, snatched his bag containing Rs.6,31,000/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR was against unknown and name of the petitioner transpired during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24295 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 2/3 during investigation, the Investigating Officer of the case claims to have investigated the CCTV footage in which petitioner along with other accused was identified based on which Rahmat, Rafique and petitioner were arrested. It is next submitted that based on disclosure of Rahmat, arms, cartridges along with the looted blue bag was recovered. Further, based on the disclosure of Rafique and petitioner, blue and black Splendor Motorcycle used in the crime were recovered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and it was Rahmat along with others who were involved in the occurrence and it was based on the disclosure made by Rahmat, the snatched bag was recovered. It is further submitted that informant in the FIR alleges that he can identify the accused persons but then the petitioner was not put on TIP. It is next submitted that charges against the petitioner stand framed.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that it is a case of road robbery which has become rampant in the State of Bihar and based on the CCTV footage, the case was investigated and thereafter accused were apprehended and based

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24295 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 3/3 on their disclosure, several articles involved in the occurrence were recovered including the motorcycle and the blue bag containing Rs.6,31,000/-.

7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in connection with Maheshkhunt P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria/Successor Court.

8. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T