Rudal Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35088 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2024 Thana- BHADAUR District- Patna ====================================================== Rudal Chauhan S/O Mahesh Chauhan Resident of Village- Shobhatikka, Police Station- Bhadaur, District- Patna(Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP For the Informant : Mr. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-11-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bhadaur P.S. Case 62/2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have fired from country made katta upon the informant's nephew which hit him on left side of stomach while being taken to Patna for treatment the informant's nephew died in the way.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 02.12.2024 and bears one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. Both parties are co-villagers and there is no intention to kill. Charge

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35088 of 2025(4) dt.17-11-2025 2/2 sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

5. The learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the main assailant and he is said to have fired upon the informant's nephew, which hit the left side of stomach of the informant's nephew and the same is corroborated by postmortem report. They further submitted that the informant and other witnesses have supported and corroborated the story of prosecution during investigation. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the trial is running on evidence at this stage, the petitioner does not deserve bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner coupled with postmortem report and material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkumar/- U T