Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4061 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2024 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran ====================================================== Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar Sahni Son of Dinesh Sahni Resident of Village- Baherwagachhi, P.S.- Nayagaon, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subhash Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nyagaon P.S. Case No.154 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. as well as under Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that Golu handed over a pistol to petitioner who fired causing firearm injuries on hand and waist.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that petitioner after taking pistol from Golu would have fired. It

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4061 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026 2/2 is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 13-9-2025. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the informant specifically alleges that it was this petitioner who fired causing firearm injury to him. It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that the informant would implicate an innocent person who had not committed the occurrence. It is also submitted that petitioner has antecedent of two criminal cases and if privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned APP, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. 7.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T