Patna High Court
CR. MISC./58770/2026 of Rishu Kumar @ Rishu Ram Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58770 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWANPUR HAT District- Siwan ====================================================== Rishu Kumar @ Rishu Ram S/O Suresh Ram R/O Village- Sarai Parauli , P.S- Bhagwanpur Hat,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58770 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWANPUR HAT District- Siwan ======================================================
Rishu Kumar @ Rishu Ram S/O Suresh Ram R/O Village- Sarai Parauli , P.S- Bhagwanpur Hat, Distt. - Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
19-08-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhagwanpur Hat P.S. Case No. 296 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b) and 29 of the Arms Act.
3. Upon identification of the petitioner in a video clip which went viral, exhibiting that three persons, including the petitioner, were standing with country-made pistol and giving threat and terrorizing public at large, the present FIR came to be instituted.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the FIR and contended that the video and photographs were received by the police on 27.06.2024. But surprisingly, the present FIR came to be instituted after a delay Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58770 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026
of one year i.e. on 29.06.2025. Even if the allegation regarding the video footage is accepted to be true, for the sake of argument, there is no compliance of Section 65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Moreover, the prosecution has not come out with a case as to whether the pistol, which was carried by the petitioner and shown in the video was a genuine pistol or a toy. The implication of the name of the petitioner in the present case is said to be his past criminal antecedent, as has been disclosed in paragraph number 3 of the bail application. However, the petitioner undertakes that he will not indulge in such activities and cooperate in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the petitioner is carrying three criminal antecedents, and it clearly shows the criminal bent of the mind of the petitioner.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the non-compliance of the prescriptions of Section 65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; besides the inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58770 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Siwan in connection with Bhagwanpur Hat P.S. Case No. 296 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further conditions that:- (I) One of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner. (II) If the petitioner is found indulged in identical matter or found engaged in terrorizing the public at large, in such circumstances, the informant/police shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of his bail.
shivank/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T