Kailu Yadav @ Kaila @ Shailesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28880 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2024 Thana- Safiyasarai District- Munger ====================================================== Kailu Yadav @ Kaila @ Shailesh Kumar Son of Late Mani Yadav @ Manilal Yadav Resident of village - Singhiya English, P.S.- Safiasarai, District - Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Safia Sarai P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 3(5) and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner has made one fire at the informant, which hit him in the thigh.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that from perusal of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28880 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026 2/3 injury report, it will transpire that the injured/informant has received the following injuries:

(i) gunshot injury of size 6 mm x 6 mm at entry wound with blackening around the wound.

(ii) 1.5 cm x 1.5 cm exit wound over medical aspect of right thigh. An X-ray of the right thigh and USG Doppler were advised for the final injury report, but the patient did not undergo the USG Doppler investigation and was given an application to make an injury report without the suggested investigation of USG Doppler. An X-ray was done at Sadar Hospital, Munger, and reported by Doctor as follows:- No body injury.

5. Learned counsel further submits that the injury which has been received by the informant is a gunshot injury but is superficial, as the entry wound is 6 mm x 6 mm. There is no repetition of fire blows. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 29.03.2025.

6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of six cases.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28880 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026 3/3 inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall remain physically present on each and every date fixed by the learned court below till the conclusion of trial. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger in connection with S.T. No. 212 of 2025 arising out of Safia Sarai P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T