Abdul Hanan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44178 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj ====================================================== Abdul Hanan S/o Late Harun Rasid @ Harul Rasid @ Harul Rasul Resident of village - Takiya Yakub, P.S.- Gopalganj Town, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Md Danish Quamar, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Aamresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2026 Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Aamresh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 17.04.2026, in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 18.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 324(4) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is of opening fire causing injury on the finger of the informant.

2/4

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It appears from the F.I.R. that although the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific allegation against him that he has fired upon the informant but the injury report does not support the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. and apart from that there is case and counter case between the parties. Petitioner and other family members have also received injury in the present occurrence and one of the injury inflicted upon the injured person is grievous in nature but the same is not on the vital part of the body. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 17.04.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the informant but fairly submits that the injury report does support the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. and apart from that petitioner carries three more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the

3/4 bail petition that out of three cases, petitioner has been acquitted in two cases by the learned Trial court and rest one case he is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for

4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

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