Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Karu Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43474 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2026 Thana- SACHIVALAYA District- Patna

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

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Karu Son of Pramod Rai Resident of Village- New Bigrahpur, Near Devi Asthan, Patna, P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 07-07-2026

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B) (a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶14

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the police had information that three persons had gathered with weapons, and on this information, police reached near Maglus Road and apprehended three persons, and they were identified as Rohit Kumar, Nitish Kumar, and Sunny Kumar. It is alleged that a weapon was recovered from their possession. The weapon was recovered, and on being asked, Sunny Kumar disclosed that he has obtained the weapon from this petitioner.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43474 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 2/3

¶17

petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits no recovery has been made from the possession of this petitioner. He also submits that the name of this petitioner has surfaced during the course of investigation in the confessional statement of Sunny Kumar. According to the statement of Sunny Kumar, in Rs. 36,000/- a weapon was made available to him by this petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that save and except the confessional statement, there is nothing against him. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 08.04.2026.

¶18

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

¶19

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 with the conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate in trial, shall remain physically present on each and every date fixed by the learned court below, one of the bailors shall be near relative and shall also mark his weekly attendance at Jakkanpur P.S. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43474 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 3/3

¶21

bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-II, Patna in connection with Sachivalaya P.S. Case No. 69 of 2026.

¶22

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

Sudhanshu/-

¶24

U T

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Karu v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Karu 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

Mahavir Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Indrajeet Kumar @ Karu Rai @ Kuru Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Sabita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Rai Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Mahto Vs The State of Bihar