Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Ayush Dangi @ Ayush Raj Dangi vs State Of Bihar on 30 July, 2026
1
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.14 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).
7706/2026
[Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 27-02-
2026 in CRM No. 86916/2025 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Patna]
AYUSH DANGI @ AYUSH RAJ DANGI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR Respondent(s)
FOR ADMISSION, IA No. 129809/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING
O.T.
Date : 30-07-2026 This matter was called on for hearing
today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Srishti Jain, Adv.
Mr. Bhoopesh Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.
Mr. S. Jha, Adv.
Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, AOR
Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv.
Ms. Ayesha Choudhary, Adv.
Mr. Pramothesh Mukherjee, Adv.
Ms. Sonali Kumari, Adv.
Ms. Ishita Singh Tomar, Adv.
Mr. Raid Hoda, Adv.
Mr. Snehil Jha, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NIRMALA NEGI
Date: 2026.07.30
19:09:48 IST
Reason: For Respondent(s) Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR
Mr. Kumar Saurav, Adv.
Mr. Divyansh Mishra, Adv.
2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Heard Mr. S. Nagamuthu, learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Saurav, learned counsel
appearing for State.
2. The present petition calls in question the
correctness of the order dated 27-02-2026 in CRM
No.86916/2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Patna. By the said order, the petitioner has been
denied the benefit of bail in connection with FIR
No.1435/2023 registered with Danapur Police Station,
District Patna, Bihar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307 & 504 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860(for short, ‘IPC’), later
Section 302 of IPC also added and under Section 27 of
the Arms Act, 1959.
3. On 14.07.2026, this Court wanted to counsel for the
State to obtain instructions on the cross case bearing
CC No.1605/2023 instituted by the petitioner’s mother.
Learned counsel for the State today reports that CC
No.1605/2023 is indeed a cross case and that is at the
stage of cognizance, with cognizance not yet taken.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
that being a cross case, under law it will have to be
tried with the case instituted against the petitioner
by the same Court and judgment delivered on the same
3
date. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the
petitioner had already undergone about two years and
seven months in custody. Learned Senior Counsel also
draws attention to the counter affidavit of the State
wherein in paragraph 6, dealing with the Forensic
Science Laboratory report (for short, ‘FSL report’), it
is recorded that the FSL report is not conclusive with
regard to the weapon of offence and as to whether the
weapon discovered at the behest of the petitioner, was
the weapon used in the offence.
5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail.
6. Accordingly, we direct that petitioner shall be
enlarged on bail subject to the satisfaction of the
concerned Trial Court in connection with the aforesaid
FIR and for the offences mentioned hereinabove.
7. Needless to say that the observations in this order
are only for the purpose of deciding the bail
application/prayer of the petitioner. The trial in
another proceedings will proceed independently in
accordance with law on its own merits uninfluenced by
any of the observations in the order.
8. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of in the
above terms.
4
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(NIRMALA NEGI) (NIKITA SINGH) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
