Ramesh Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26905 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-410 Year-2024 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Ramesh Chauhan S/O Late Jitu Chauhan R/O Vill.- Balchand Bigha, P.S.- Noor Sarai, Dist.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Sr. Advocate Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate Ms. Srishti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Ashutosh Jha, Advocate Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Bijay Kant Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2025 Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ashutosh Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 17.09.2024 in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 410 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 11.09.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner over a petty dispute fired upon the father of the informant resulting into his death on the spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26905 of 2025(4) dt.27-06-2025 2/2 the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and the case diary have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the FIR that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the father of the informant on his chest due to which he died on the spot. Apart from that the medical evidence (postmortem report) also supports the allegation as alleged in the FIR.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there is direct and specific allegation of firing against the petitioner which is supported by the medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 410 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

7. Prayer is refused.

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