Allowed¶19

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Oct 2025CR. MISC./51704/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.51704 of 2025, decided 17-10-2025, Shailendra Singh, J — regular bail allowed in murder trial (section 302 read with section 34 IPC), S.T. Case No. 950/2023 / Teghra P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023, District Begusarai; grounds: custody since 01.04.2023, hostile PW-1 and PW-2, hearsay informant PW-3, source witness Chandramani @ Pappu Rai not produced, official witnesses pending; bail bond Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with S.T. Case No. 950/2023. ¶19

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun Kumar Vs The… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51704 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2023 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun Kumar, S/o- Ram Karan Rai, R/oGaura 01, Ward No- 3, P.S.- Teghra, District-Begusarai

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv. Mr. Amar Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Sushan Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 17-10-2025

¶11

Heard Mr. Rahul Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned APP for the State.

¶12

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 950/2023, arising out of Teghra P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner’s counsel are that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 01.04.2023 and in the FIR the informant simply raised suspicion against this petitioner and made allegations on the basis of hearsay information, which is very weak evidence and in the charge-sheet, five witnesses have been shown as prosecution witnesses, out of them, three non-official witnesses have been

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51704 of 2025(3) dt.17-10-2025 2/3

¶15

examined, whose deposition’s copies have been filed with this petition. It is further submitted that two non-official witnesses (PW-1 & PW-2) went hostile, though third witness (PW3/informant) has not been declared hostile but her deposition clearly shows that she is not an eyewitness rather a hearsay witness and according to her, the information with regard to the occurrence of murder being committed by this petitioner and coaccused, was informed to her by one, namely, Chandramani @ Pappu Rai but the said person has not been made a witness by the prosecution and also, no step has been taken to produce him as a witness. It is lastly submitted that though all non-official witnesses have been examined but official witnesses are yet to be examined and there may be some delay in the completion of petitioner’s trial.

¶16

4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that against this petitioner, there is serious allegation and he was involved in killing the informant’s brother.

¶17

5. Considering the above stated facts and mainly the petitioner’s custody period and the examination of all nonofficial witnesses as stated above, so, the release of the petitioner will not affect the prosecution in any manner and

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51704 of 2025(3) dt.17-10-2025 3/3

¶19

there may be some delay in the completion of the petitioner’s trial as official witnesses of the prosecution are yet to be examined, in my opinion, it is a fit case for bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be released 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 the court concerned in connection with S.T. Case No. 950/2023, arising out of Teghra P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023.

¶20

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶21

annu/-

¶22

U T

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun 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

Banti Mandal @ Banti Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sangram Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Yadav @ Nitish Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Madan Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Chandramani Yadav @ Chandan Vs The State of Bihar