Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69434 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2025 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar S/o Suresh Prasad @ Suresh Yadav R/o Village- Tarpura, P.S.- Masaurhi, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prithvi Nath Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Yogendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seek bail in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 383 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, upon confidential information, informant along with police officials proceeded towards stadium in Tineri village. After seeing the police, 3-4 persons started running, police chased them but however, they manged to escape. It is alleged that one country made pistol, two live cartridges and two motorcycles were recovered from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in FIR. During the course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69434 of 2025(2) dt.19-11-2025 2/3 investigation, the name of the petitioner has been transpired in this case upon the confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar. Except confessional statement of said co-accused, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity of the present petitioner with the alleged occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He has no concern with any of the seized motorcycles. Petitioner is in custody since 02.06.2025 and he bears criminal antecedent of five cases out of which in four cases petitioner is on bail. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that name of the petitioner has been surfaced in this upon the confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar and, hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69434 of 2025(2) dt.19-11-2025 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Masaurhi in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 383 of 2025, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioners will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(iv) Petitioner shall furnish mobile number at the time of furnishing bail bond and the said mobile number shall continue in operating condition till disposal of the case and he shall get his presence marked before the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station on the first Tuesday of every month. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T