CR. MISC./28308/2026 of Raja Dubey Vs The State of Bihar on 19 June 2026

ORAL ORDER

19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant was going to meet the authority of Chausa Power Plant on his Mahendra Thar vehicle. He stopped near the shop of Chandan Chaursiya at Mohanpurva for purchasing a bottle of water. As he reached near the right side of his vehicle, three persons on a bike arrived started firing due to which informant’s brother Arjun Yadav received three gun shot injuries and fell down there. The miscreants proceeded towards Bechanpurva. The injured brother of informant was being rushed to the Sadar Hospital, Buxar from where, he was referred to Trauma Center, Banaras. During course of reaching Trauma Center, Banaras, Arjun Yadav died. The deceased was a contractor in the Chausa Power Plant and it alleged that the petitioner along with others due to competition between them has killed the deceased.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the perusal of the FIR, it is clear that altogether 8 persons are named but the name of this petitioner does not find place in FIR. The name of the petitioner has surfaced during course of investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused Manoranjan Pandey @ Raja Pandey. It has further been submitted that from the perusal of the FIR, it is clear that that allegation in the first part of the FIR is that three persons on a bike have fired at the deceased and in the confessional statement also, it has come that three persons have fired on the deceased. He has further been submitted that save and except the confessional statement, there is nothing against the petitioner. In this case, the informant is said to be the eye witness of this case but he has neither identified those three persons who arrived and fired at the deceased nor he was sure about the involvement of the petitioner in this case. He has further been submitted other similarly situated co-accused person has been granted bail by learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 11592 of 2026. Learned counsel has also submitted that as per confessional statement of co-accused, the main assailant of this case is Nikhil and Dinesh. A statement has been made in para-3 that the petitioner is having five criminal antecedents. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.01.2026.

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

6. 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 released on bail in connection with Buxar (Mufassil) P.S. Case No. 232 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar with following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall cooperate in trial and shall remain physically present in the trial court on each and every fixed date.

(ii) One of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioner.

(iii) Petitioner is also directed to mark his weekly attendance at Buxar (T) P.S.

Sneha/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T