Rahul Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22478 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-820 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Rahul Raj, S/o- Late Rambinay Sharma, R/o - Ajwan, P.S - Naubatpur, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Naubatpur P. S. Case No. 820 of 2024, registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The main submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel are that this is the second attempt by the petitioner to get the relief of regular bail, although his earlier prayer was rejected by this Bench vide order dated 18.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50576 of 2025. The petitioner has renewed his prayer mainly on the ground of his long custody, having remained in custody for more than one year and seven months, as he has been languishing in jail since 24.12.2024. The second ground is the lack of progress in the trial. It is further submitted that most of the prosecution witnesses to be examined during the trial are police personnel, therefore, the release of the petitioner on bail at this stage will not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22478 of 2026(3) dt.31-07-2026 2/2 affect the prosecution in any manner. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is a young person, though, against him there is one criminal antecedent but he is on bail in the said case.

4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and mainly taking into account the petitioner's custody period of more than one year and seven months and coupled with this fact that despite the charges having been framed against the petitioner on 30.10.2025, no prosecution witness has turned up before the trial court despite most of the prosecution witnesses are police personnel as appears from the trial court's report which shows the prosecution's lingering attitude in the trial of the petitioner, in my opinion, in the said circumstances, the petitioner now deserves to the relief of bail. 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 concerned Court in connection with Naubatpur P. S. Case No. 820 of 2024.

(Shailendra Singh, J) Rajiv/- U T