IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75037 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2024 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ======================================================

Arvind Kumar Yadav S/o Devnarayan Yadav R/o Village- Chhaparadhi, P.S.-

Khajauli, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

3 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 118(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons are said to have fired upon the informant. The petitioner is alleged to have fired upon the informant, which hit below his waist.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case along with other accused persons, although the present incident is a fall out of gang rivalry between two factions and the injured also is a man of criminal background. It is further submitted that the allegation has been made upon the petitioner that he fired at the injured below his waist and the injury report indicates that there is one lacerated entry wound on the left thigh, which is simple in nature. The other injuries on the left forearm has not been attributed to this petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2025 and the charges were framed on 22.07.2025. However, even after lapse of more than seven months, not a single witness has been produced on behalf of the prosecution, as such, there is no likelihood of earlier conclusion of the trial.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of bail on the ground that there is specific allegation upon the petitioner of opening fire and he has several antecedents, however, in response it is submitted that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and considering the fact that injuries attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature, coupled with the fact that despite framing of charge no witness has been examined and the petitioner has remained in custody for long, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani/concerned Court below in connection with Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 324 of 2024 subject to condition that:-

(i) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned. (Soni Shrivastava, J)

anand/-

U T