Ritik Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Ranjan Sinna, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 13-05-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

A.P.P for the State.

¶14

2 . The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Delha P.S. Case No. 243 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-A), (1-B) (I), 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

¶15

3 . As per the prosecution case, the informant, a police officer, has alleged that one FIR-named accused, Rohit Kumar @ Mudi, disclosed in his confessional statement that after committing the murder of Suwab Paswan, he had handed over the weapon used in the offence to the petitioner for safekeeping. It has further been alleged that, on the basis of such information, the house of Guddu Paswan @ Mugli @ Amrit Paswan was raided, and altogether three country-made pistols along with

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26388 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 2/3

¶17

three live cartridges were recovered from the first floor of his house. The petitioner was found present there at the time of the raid, search, and seizure.

¶18

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that the house from where the alleged recovery was made belongs to co-accused Guddu Paswan @ Mugli @ Amrit Paswan, and the petitioner is merely a servant in the said house and was not aware of the misdeeds of co-accused, namely Guddu Paswan @ Mugli @ Amrit Paswan, the owner of the house. It has also been submitted that, as per the prosecution case itself, at best an offence under Section 238 of the BNS is made out, which is bailable in nature. It is further submitted that co-accused Rohit Kumar @ Mudi, who in his confessional statement stated that he had handed over the murder weapon to the petitioner without disclosing the fact that the alleged weapons recovered contained murder weapons. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has got clean criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 26.10.2025.

¶19

5 . Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26388 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 3/3

¶21

6 . Heard the parties and perused the record.

¶22

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

¶23

case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Gaya, in connection with Delha P.S. Case No. 243 of 2025.

¶24

8. The application stands allowed.

¶25

(Praveen Kumar, J)

¶26

Jyoti/-

¶27

U T

Ritik Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik 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

Sunil Nut Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prabhakar Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigation Bureau

Mantu Sahani @ Mantu Kumar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar