Raja Rai @ Raja Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39470 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2023 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Raja Rai @ Raja Kumar Son of Baijnath Rai @ Baidya Nath Ray R/O Village- Bathaul, P.S.- Nanpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv.

Mr.Virendra Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Md. Shadab Alam Wazdi, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 08-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No.107 of 2025, arising out of Nanpur P.S. Case No.339 of 2023 lodged under Sections 341, 302 and 120B of the IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act which is pending before the court of Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 19.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.19031 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner's antecedent is not clean. There is one criminal case pending against him and he is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39470 of 2025(3) dt.08-08-2025 2/3 26.11.2023.

5. Counsel further submits that one of the co-accused, namely, Ram Babu Das, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.03.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.82836 of 2023. He further submits that on parity ground, bail may be granted to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the FIR is in 2 parts. In first part, the allegation of firing is there and in 2nd part, when the father of the informant fell down, the firing has been made.

7. Counsel further submits that from the FIR, it transpires that the specific allegation is against accused, Dinesh Das, Umesh Das and Ramesh Das, but in second part, the allegation is against Dinesh Das, Rahul Saini and Raja Rai. He further submits that the specific allegation is against the petitioner.

8. Counsel further submits that progress report has been called for. From the report, it transpires that not a single witness have been examined in this case.

9. It transpires to this Court that the accused to whom bail has been granted i.e., Ram Babu Das, there is allegation of firing, but the allegation of repeated firing is against the present

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39470 of 2025(3) dt.08-08-2025 3/3 petitioner.

10. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

11. However, speedy trial is a constitutional vision of justice. As such, it is directed to the Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi to do the needful and direct the SHO /I.O. of this case to produce all the witnesses as earliest as possible. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T