Lekh Raj @ Raj Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29151 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-377 Year-2025 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Lekh Raj @ Raj kamat son of Sri Shambhu Kamat Resident of MohallaNaya Nagar, Ward No 13, Nagar Parishad Supaul, Ps And District -Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 377 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) B.N.S. corresponded to Section 307/34 as well as Section 37 of Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 19.07.2025 at about 02:00 PM, informant's younger son, Nitish Kumar informed him that his brother, Manish Kumar had been shot by an unknown person and was undergoing treatment at Anant Prerena Hospital, Supaul.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29151 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the FIR was instituted against unknown persons. The injured, Manish Kumar, has been examined in Paragraph 14 of the case diary, wherein he has not identified the assailant rather, he has stated that an unknown person fired upon him and has only furnished a description of the assailant. It has been contended that no Test Identification Parade (TIP) was conducted and the petitioner has not been identified by the injured. Learned counsel has further submitted that the mobile number disclosed by the injured does not belong to the petitioner. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent, in which he is on bail and he is in custody since 27.11.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Heard the parties and perused the record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29151 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 3/3 Case No. 377 of 2025.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar, J) Sahil/- U T