Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25714/2026dismissed

Raushan @ Raushan Raj @ Raushan Kumar Yadav @ Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-06Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25714 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Raushan @ Raushan Raj @ Raushan Kumar Yadav @ Raushan Kumar S/o Late Jai Jai Ram Yadav @ Jhoho @ Jhojho Yadav Resident of village - Samastipur Tola, Sadipur Tola, Sadipur, Ward No. 02, P.S - Sahebpur Kamal, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 09.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 61085 of 2025, which reads as under:

"Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25714 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of killing the deceased. It is alleged that the petitioner called the deceased and shot at him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. The petitioner is in custody since 23.05.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. It is for the petitioner to explain how the deceased was shot at but the petitioner has not explained the same, therefore, the role of the petitioner in this crime cannot be doubted.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 23.05.2025 and therefore, he deserves bail.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the trial is on the verge of conclusion and only one witness is left to be examined.

6. Considering the gravity of the offence, the fact that the trial is on the verge of conclusion and no fresh ground for grant of bail is made out, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25714 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 3/3

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T