Adarsh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19977 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Adarsh Singh S/o Braj Kishore Singh @ Brij Kishore Singh Resident of Village- Dudhaula Gachhi PS-Sonepur, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with S.Tr. No. 882 of 2024 arising out of Sonepur P.S. Case No.495 of 2024 registered for the offence under sections 307, 341, 323, 324, 325, 452, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation in the F.I.R is that the petitioner along with five others armed with lathi, danda and pistol came to the house of the petitioner. On the order of accused Braj Kishore Singh, accused Girija Singh @ Rohit fired upon the informant due which he sustained injuries in his abdomen and accused Adarsh Singh (petitioner) fired upon the brother of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19977 of 2025(3) dt.22-05-2025 2/3 informant from a very close range due to which he sustained grievous injuries in his stomach when he interfered to save the informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Both the parties are the agnates and there is case and counter case. The occurrence has taken place due to partition of land and both the parties have sustained injuries. The petitioner is in custody since 14.06.2024 and undertakes to co-operate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant by stating that the allegations against the petitioner is of firing upon informant's brother and the injury report of the injured person Kamlesh Singh is on record and a perusal of the same would go to show that he received gun shot injury which is grievous in nature.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court regarding stage of the trial after framing of charge and the same is on record which would go to show that out of six non-official witnesses, five witnesses have been examined and the informant, doctor and the Investigating Officer still remain to be examined. However, learned counsel for the informant submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19977 of 2025(3) dt.22-05-2025 3/3 that in the meantime the informant has also been examined in the case and only two official witnesses still remain to be examined.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and also with respect to the stage of the trial, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the application is thus rejected.
8. The learned trial Court is however directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within a period of four months from the production/communication of a copy of this order.
9. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period of time, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T