Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29541/2026rejected

Rajeshwar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-07Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29541 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2021 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rajeshwar Rai S/o Lal Babu Rai R/o Village - Lalua, PS - Ghorasahan, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner:

Mr. Kundan Rathore alias Kundan Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026 Heard Mr. Kundan Rathore alias Kundan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalan Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 21.08.2025 in connection with Ghorashan P.S. Case No. 41 of 2021, FIR dated 29.01.2021 registered for the offence under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the on 28.01.2021 at about 10.00 P.M, the petitioner along with other accused persons came at the house of the informant and caught hold his son. When the family members of the informant raised objections then this petitioner fired on the head of the informant's son due to which he died on spot. It is further alleged that all the accused persons tried to kill the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29541 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/2 informant and his family members.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely been implicated in this case due to village politics and the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 21.08.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he fired on the head of the informant's son due to which informant's son died on spot and apart from that the alleged occurrence took place in the yer 2021 and the petitioner has been absconding since 2021.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Ghorashan P.S. Case No. 41 of 2021, pending in the Court of C.J.M, East Champaran, Motihari/Concern Court, East Champaran, Motihari.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T