Roshan Kewat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81115 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-376 Year-2025 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== Roshan Kewat Son of Umesh Kewat Resident of Village - Gowar Dharampur, Police Station - Barh, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Tej Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2026 Heard Mr. Tej Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.09.2025, in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 376 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 23.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 118, 109, 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has fired upon the victim causing injury to his stomach.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that the F.I.R. is in two parts, in first part, there is general and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81115 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026 2/3 omnibus allegation against the petitioners including the petitioner and in second part, there is specific allegation that he has fired upon the victim. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. and the injury report of the injured person does not support the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and the injury inflicted upon the injured person does not support the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Barh, Patna in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 376 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81115 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026 3/3

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

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