Ravi Kumar @ Ravin Kumar @ Ravin Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49543 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2024 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Ravi Kumar @ Ravin Kumar @ Ravin Yadav S/O Lucho Yadav R/O VillageHathawan, P.S- Alauli, Dist.- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Indrajit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3) of the BNS read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that on 23.10.2024 at 07:30 PM he had gone for a walk, when six unknown accused on two motorcycles came and fired four rounds causing injury on his mouth and he suffered three firearm injuries on his legs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is against unknown and the petitioner came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49543 of 2025(3) dt.10-10-2025 2/3 during the course of investigation based on confessional statement of apprehended accused Ravish in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2025. It is next submitted that Ravish had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 23738/2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 30.04.2025 passed by a learned coordinate Bench. It is thus submitted that person in whose confession the name of the petitioner transpired has been granted the privilege of regular bail, as such the case of the petitioner is on a better footing.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and in the event if privilege of bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49543 of 2025(3) dt.10-10-2025 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bithan P.S. Case No.99/2024.
7. It is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial, in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T