Hiralal Kumar Rajbhar @ Hiralal Rajbhar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Hiralal Kumar Rajbhar @ Hiralal Rajbhar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Purnea, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on bail in Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025, in view of the alleged recoveries and the criminal antecedents pleaded by the State.

Court's answer

Having heard the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Purnea, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - Regular bail granted. The Patna High Court (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J.), by order dated 15-05-2026 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 27315 of 2026, enlarged the petitioner Hiralal Kumar Rajbhar @ Hiralal Rajbhar on bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025 (Purnia), registered for offences under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 331(4), 303(2), 317(5), 310(4), 310(5) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-b)(i), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution case was that one silver knife and a bike were recovered from the petitioner's possession. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that nothing was recovered, that the seizure-list witnesses were police personnel and that Section 105 of the BNSS was not complied with in making the seizure; the petitioner was in judicial custody since 25.10.2025. The learned APP opposed bail, pleading criminal antecedent of three cases. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Court directed enlargement on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Purnea.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27315 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia

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

Hiralal Kumar Rajbhar @ Hiralal Rajbhar S/O Dilip Rajbhar Resident of Singhiya Basti, Gulabbagh, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Fazle Karim, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Gulnar Begum, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

2 15-05-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 331(4), 303(2), 317(5), 310(4), 310(5) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-b)(i), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the possession of this petitioner, one silver knife and a bike were recovered.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27315 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 2/2

case. He also submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.10.2025.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of three cases.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Purnea in connection with Sessions Trial No. 167 of 2025 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Sudhanshu/Raushan/-

U T