SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 10217

PATNA HIGH COURT
Arun Kumar Tiwari @ Arun Tiwari
Cr.Misc.-1657/2026



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1657 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua)

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

Arun Kumar Tiwari @ Arun Tiwari S/O Rajendra Tiwari R/O Village-

Anantpura, P.S.- Ramgarh, Distt.- Kaimur, Bhabhua.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Tiwari, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA

ORAL ORDER

2 05-02-2026 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.

Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and

3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 25(1-b)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of

the Arms Act.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits

that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

alleges that his son was coming back home after cleaning the

temple, when he was intercepted by the accused persons including

the petitioner and the accused persons said to kill him on which

Santosh fired from the roof top of Mahima Shaw but missed

thereafter again fired causing injury on chest leading to his death.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the

##PAGE2##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1657 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026

2/3

petitioner submits that petitioner being brother of Santosh has been

falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant with general

and omnibus allegation. It is further submitted that from perusal of

the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific

allegation of firing is against Santoh but then during the course of

investigation, the petitioner came to be implicated on the ground

that he had given the gun to Santosh from which he fired. It is next

submitted that informant in the FIR does not even remotely

suggest that it was this petitioner who had given the gun to

Santosh for committing the occurrence but then during the course

of investigation, by way of afterthought, the petitioner was also

implicated. It is also submitted that father of the petitioner,

namely, Rajendra Tiwari had approached this Court seeking

anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 83979 of 2025 and the

same came to be allowed by an order dated 05.02.2026. It is

submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in

the investigation to prove his innocence.

5. Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned A.P.P. for the

State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant

opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then

are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned Senior

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that it was Santosh

who is alleged to have caused firearm injury to the son of the

##PAGE3##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1657 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026

3/3

informant and the informant in the FIR does not even remotely

suggest that the gun was given by the petitioner to Santosh for

committing the occurrence.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

Senior Counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named,

in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court

within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is

pending/Successor Court in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case

No. 212 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under

Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.

7. However, it is made clear that if the investigating

officer of the case files an application bringing to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top