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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2876

PATNA HIGH COURT
ARUN KUMAR JHA, J
Gautam Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84027 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Niranjan Parihar
For the Respondents: Mr. (Dr.) Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP

The court granted bail based on non-vital injury and the duration of custody.

Headnote:In this case, the petitioner seeks bail under B.N.S. related offenses stemming from a shooting incident during a land dispute. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner shot the informant. However, the court finds the injury non-vital and considers the petitioner's custody period. The court grants bail under specific conditions.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

2 09-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Munger Muffasil P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025 dated 04.04.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109, 126(2), 127(2), 190, 352, 351(2)

and 324(4) of the B.N.S. , 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act .

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant received news about his wheat crop being cut by co-accused persons. The informant reached at the spot and some altercation took place. The other side resorted to firing and this petitioner shot at the informant in his right thigh.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that background of land dispute is admitted and the injury report of the victim shows a simple injury.

Though in the rejection order the learned Sessions Judge has mentioned that injury report shows entry wound over medial aspect of thigh region and on the basis of this report, injury could be a fire-arm injury, but there was no intention to cause death and the whole occurrence took place while harvesting of wheat crop which is also claimed by the informant. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is having antecedent of one case. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 27.09.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against this petitioner that he fired upon the informant and informant received a fire-

arm injury in his left thigh.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the simple nature of injury on a non-vital part and also considering the period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner, above- named, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail B.N.S. of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger / concerned Court, in connection with Munger Muffasil P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025 subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S. S. and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.

(iii) In case of non-appearance of the petitioner on single date or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

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