Dismissed¶21

Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan @ Raj Kumar Paswan @ Buta v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Dec 2025CR. MISC./61710/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.; order dt. 10-12-2025; Criminal Miscellaneous No.61710 of 2025; Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025, District Gaya; BNS Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 326(g); regular bail application rejected; petitioner Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan; informant Pooja Devi; house set on fire by igniting cooking cylinder; serious burn injuries; independent witnesses supported allegation (case diary para 6); custody since 22.03.2025; liberty to renew bail prayer before Trial Court after one year in custody.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail refused; petitioner given liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the Trial Court after completing one year in custody. ¶21

Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan @ Raj Kumar Paswan @ Buta Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail refused; petitioner given liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the Trial Court after completing one year in custody.

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody in Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025 (offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 326(g) of the BNS), should be granted regular bail.

¶19

Court's answer

On perusal of the FIR, case diary and the impugned order dated 13.06.2025, the Court found that the petitioner entered the informant's house, assaulted her and set her house on fire by igniting the cooking cylinder, causing serious burn injuries apparent from the injury report, and that independent witnesses (paragraph 6 of the case diary) supported the allegation levelled against him; considering all aspects and the serious nature of the allegations, the Court was not inclined to grant bail.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The regular bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

¶21

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the Trial Court after completing one year in custody.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - rejection. High Court of Judicature at Patna (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No.61710 of 2025, oral order dated 10-12-2025, arising out of Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025 (District Gaya), Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 326(g) BNS: regular bail application of petitioner Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan @ Raj Kumar Paswan @ Buta (in judicial custody since 22.03.2025) rejected. Per the FIR and case diary, the petitioner allegedly entered the informant's (Pooja Devi's) house demanding money and jewellery and, on refusal, set the house on fire by igniting the cooking cylinder, causing serious burn injuries apparent from the injury report; independent witnesses (case diary paragraph 6) supported the allegation. Considering the serious nature of the allegations, the Court declined bail but left the petitioner at liberty to renew his bail prayer before the Trial Court after completing one year in custody.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61710 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan @ Raj Kumar Paswan @ Buta S/o Ashok Paswan Resident of Bageshwari Mandir, Neal Kali mandir, PS- Delha, DistGaya

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 10-12-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Vishnupa P.S Case No. 43 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 326(g) of the BNS.

¶15

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner entered the house of the informant and started demanding money and jewellery and upon refusal petitioner set the house of the informant of fire by igniting the cylinder kept in her house due to which informant burnt brutally.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61710 of 2025(3) dt.10-12-2025 2/3

¶18

submits that petitioner was not having good terms with the informant namely Pooja Devi. He further submits that petitioner entered the house of the informant and some heated arguments took place and this offence took place. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 22.03.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

¶19

However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶20

On perusal of the FIR, case diary and the impugned order dated 13.06.2025, it appears that petitioner had entered the house of the informant afterwards assaulted her and set her house on fire by igniting the cooking cylinder due to which she sustained serious burnt injuries which is apparent from the injury report. From paragraph 6 of the case diary, it appears that independent witnesses has supported the allegation levelled against the petitioner. Considering all aspects of the case and the serious nature of allegation leveled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21