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) 3691

PATNA HIGH COURT
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Ajay Chouhan @ Golu Chouhan @ Golu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81670 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mrs.Kumari Anupam
For the Respondents:Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP, Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Shahi, Advocate

Bail granted due to insufficient specific evidence against accused in fatal shooting case.

Headnote:(1) The petitioner seeks bail for alleged offenses under Sections 103(1), 61, and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, citing a lack of specific accusations against him based on the FIR. The opposition highlights that the petitioner is implicated as one of the accused in the indiscriminate firing that led to a death. (2) The key issues involve determining the strength of prosecution evidence against the petitioner and whether remaining in custody is warranted due to the nature of the charges. The Court reasoned that the solitary injury contradicts joint culpability and cited a precedent where similar bail was granted. (3) The prayer for bail is allowed, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

3 27-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61 and 3(5) of the B.N.S . and Section 27 of the Arms Act .

3. As per prosecution case, all 10 F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, along with 2 to 3 unknown persons, indiscriminately fired, as a result of which, son of informant died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. As per F.I.R., all 10 named accused persons, along with 2 to 3 unknown persons, indiscriminately fired upon son of informant, however, as per post mortem report, only one fire arm injury was found on the body of the deceased, which itself falsifies the entire prosecution case. Allegation of firing is general and omnibus and no specific accusation of overt act has been alleged against this petitioner. Similarly situated co-accused Vishal Sharma has been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 08.12.2025 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 79042 of 2025. Moreover, charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of petitioner.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, the prayer for bail of petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-Vth, Siwan in connection with S.T. No. 485/2025, arising out of Mairwa P.S.

Case No. 136 of 2025.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

anay U T

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