IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67370 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-706 Year-2024 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna ======================================================

Mazid Khan @ Majid Khan @ D D @ DDYa S/O Late Kammu Khan R/O Village- Durukhi Gali, Sabzi Bagh, P.S- Pirbahore, Dist.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

8 26-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191 (3), 190, 308 (2), 308 (5), 103 (1), 61 (2) of B.N.S and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with co-

accused persons are alleged to have indiscriminately fired on informant’s brother due to which he sustained injury and died.

4. Learned senior counsel has submitted that although the name of the petitioner transpired in the First Information Report along with one Raja and 4-5 unknown persons of having resorted to firing upon the deceased and an eye witness account of the same has been given by the informant, during the course of investigation, the informant has narrated a different story and he does not appear to be an eye witness in his further statement and has rather stated that he reached the place of occurrence after the deceased had already been shot whereafter he was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. He has only taken the name of the petitioner to be the main conspirator of the occurrence and that he has got the deceased killed by his gang members. Further, the F.I.R has been lodged after preparation of the inquest report of which the informant was a witness and yet did not disclose the names in column 6 of the said inquest report. It has also been pointed out that one Sonu Singh was arrested during the course of investigation who confessed his guilt that he along with other accused persons had gone to the place of occurrence and the said Sonu Singh and Vicky fired 5-6 rounds on the deceased and the presence of Sonu Singh and Vicky also stands confirmed by the identification made on the basis of the CCTV footage from the local persons and also the brother of the co-accused Vicky as would appear from the paragraphs 39 and 41 of the case diary. It is, thus, submitted that, at best, looking at the entire materials appearing during the course of investigation, the case against the petitioner would be that of a conspirator, however, he has also denied the said fact and has stated in his confessional statement that he was at Delhi at the relevant time. Further, the alleged shooter, Md. Sonu, has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31305 of 2025. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 10.11.2024 and the report with regard to the stage of the case suggests that the case has only been committed by an order dated 16.02.2026 and no progress has been made thereafter. However, the petitioner undertakes to present himself on each and every date fixed in the case and co- operate in the framing of charges, in case, the same has not been framed.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition on the ground that the petitioner has some criminal antecedent and he is the main conspirator. However, in response, it is submitted that antecedents are of minor nature and the petitioner is on bail in all the cases.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the materials that have been collected during the course of investigation su