Ranjai Singh @ Ranjai Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44682 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ranjai Singh @ Ranjai Kumar Singh, aged about 26 years, S/o Amika Singh @ Ambika Singh R/o Village- Darshan, Belaur Tola, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sangeeta Sharma, APP For the Informant :

Ms. Priya, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6), 118(1) and 109 of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner along with other co-accused person snatched cash amounting to Rs.1,50,000 /- from the informant and also made open fire after which the informant sustained gunshot injury in his arm.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that during investigation alleged country made pistol has been recovered from the house of co-accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44682 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/2 Nitish Kumar and nothing has been recovered either from house of petitioner or from his conscious possession. He submits that petitioner is in custody since 10.03.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he had made fire upon the informant.

6. On perusal of the First Information Report, case diary along with injury report and impugned order dated 02.06.2025, it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he had made the fire upon the informant after which he sustained fire arm injury and all the witnesses have supported the prosecution case. So, considering all facts and circumstances of the case submission of learned counsel of both the parties, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Harshita/- U T