Chhotelal Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21823 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2024 Thana- YADOPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Chhotelal Singh S/o Jangbahadur Singh, R/o Village- Jadopur, Dukh Haran, P.S- Jadopur, Distt.- Gopalganj, State- Bihar. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Adarsh Ranjan, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Lalit Narayan Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Yadopur P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024 dated 19.10.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109 and 124(2) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, co-accused Uday Singh and one unknown threw acid on the husband of the informant who received serious burn injury on his body and subsequently died during treatment. The name of the petitioner transpired during investigation for also being involved in the said occurrence.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely

2/4 been implicated in the present case. The petitioner was not named in the FIR and his name transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Uday Singh. The Police found from the call detail report that the petitioner and Uday Singh were in continuous touch on mobile phone and this is the reason for implication of the petitioner in the present case. He further submits that except for the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no cogent material against the petitioner and call detail report is of no consequence and could not be taken as an evidence of involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence resulting in the death of husband of the informant.

He further submits that the petitioner did not provide any acid to the co-accused and there is no allegation of any overt act against the petitioner. He next submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from person or possession of this petitioner. He further submits that petitioner has one criminal antecedent under NDPS Act and he is on bail in the said case. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 21.10.2024 and chargesheet has been submitted.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently

3/4 opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that when the co-accused Uday Singh was apprehended, his statement was recorded and in his confessional statement, he named this petitioner who supplied him the acid which was used in the occurrence. He further submits that husband of the informant died due to the acid injuries.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the remoteness of allegation and also considering the period of custody and submission of chargesheet, the petitioner, abovenamed, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gopalganj / concerned Court, in connection with Yadopur P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.

4/4 (iii) In case of non-appearance of the petitioner on single date or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Shahnawaz/- U T