Rahul Kumar Sahni @ Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 11-07-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024 dated 05.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6), 109, 317(2) and 111 of B.N.S. and Section 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 and 27 of Arms Act.

¶15

3. As per the prosecution case, four unknown miscreants boarded on two motorcycles dashed the informant and snatched Rs. one lakh and his Pithu bag containing Laptop, finger print scanner, mouse, charger, mobile and passbook, thereafter they started fleeing away, in the meantime, one miscreant fired on his thigh, causing fire arms injury and he fell

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28940 of 2025(3) dt.11-07-2025 2/3

¶17

down. It is further alleged that with the assistance of the villagers, one of the miscreants was apprehended and from the said looted bag containing laptop etc. and a pistol were also recovered from his possession.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused person. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather the allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 08.07.2024 as stated in para-2 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner which is kept on the record. The co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 73577 of 2024.

¶19

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

¶20

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28940 of 2025(3) dt.11-07-2025 3/3

¶22

of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 133 of 2024.

¶23

7. The application stands allowed.

¶24

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶25

Shivam/-

¶26

U T

Rahul Kumar Sahni @ Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar Sahni @ Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Niranjan Kumar Das @ Niranjan Das Vs The State of Bihar

Govind Sao Vs The State of Bihar

Ritesh Raj @ Gunda @ Guddu Vs the State of Bihar

Indrajeet Kushwaha @ Indrajeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Gupta @ Ashok Kumar Sahu Vs The State of Bihar