Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5544 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Guddu kumar Son of Janeshwar Singh Resident of Village- Bagen, PsAkodhigola, Dist- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ravi Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 01.11.2025 in connection with Akodhigola P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 11.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109, 308(2), 308(3), 352, 351(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other accused persons are alleged to have surrounded the informant, abused him and shot fire on him due to which the informant became unconscious.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5544 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It appears from the FIR that there is no specific allegation of any assault, overt act or firing attributed against the petitioner. The specific allegation of firing is attributed against co-accused persons, namely, Saroj and Dhiraj and at best, the petitioner is a member of mob and the petitioner is in custody since 01.11.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and apart from that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in one case and one case is pending for consideration before the competent court of law.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also the fact that there is no specific allegation of any assault, overt act or firing attributed against the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, 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 the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, Rohtas in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5544 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 3/3 with Akodhigola P.S. Case No. 400 of 2025, with the following conditions:

i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ranjeet/- U T