IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57667 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2024 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ======================================================

Md Waquar @ Waquar Ahmad S/O Rafi Alam Resident of village- Akarthapa, Ward No.- 08, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

7 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 254 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 308(2), 109, 119(1), 352, 351(2), 326, 305, 76, 61(2), 191(2), 190 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the petitioner, along with others, arrived at the door of the informant, and it is further alleged that the petitioner started making indiscriminate firing. Thereafter, Md. Safi Ahmad fired a musket at Tarique. Md. Rahul fired with a country-made pistol at Parween.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation is that the petitioner fired at Md. Rashid, and from perusal of the injury report of Md. Rashid, it is clear that he has received two pellet injuries on his right arm and left knee. The nature of injury is simple in nature. It has also been submitted that apart from this, there is a counter version of this case and there is also a land dispute between the parties. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.05.2025.

5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the informant and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.

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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Araria in connection with Bhargama P.S.

Case No. 254 of 2024.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Sudhanshu/-

U T