Amit Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68369 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2018 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== Amit Singh Son of Sheo Kumar Singh @ Shiv Kumar Singh Resident of village - Shahpur, Police Station - Sasaram (Muffasil), District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arvind Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 201 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms act. Later on after death of son of informant Section 302 of the IPC.
3. The allegation against the petitioner, Amit Singh, is that on 22.10.2018 at about 05:00 P.M., he, along with coaccused Navneet Mishra and Amjad Khan, allegedly arrived on a motorcycle near the house of the informant while armed with country-made firearms. It is alleged that during a verbal altercation, the petitioner fired a shot with the intent to kill,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68369 of 2025(6) dt.04-02-2026 2/3 which caused a firearm injury near the left temple of the victim, Mukesh Gupta. Thereafter, the accused persons allegedly fled away from the place of occurrence while firing in the air.
4. While making prayer for bail, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the informant, who is father of the deceased, did not support the case of the prosecution. During his deposition and similarly, other witnesses examined till date have also not supported the occurrence. The depositions of the witnesses have been annexed with the supplementary affidavit. The petitioner has been in custody since 18.02.2025.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above-named, is directed to furnish bail bond and on doing so, the court below shall release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Sasaram, Rohtas/concerned court in connection with Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 201 of 2018, subject to the following conditions that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68369 of 2025(6) dt.04-02-2026 3/3 shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.
7. The petitioner shall physically appear before the learned court below on each and every date, failing which, his bail bond shall stand cancelled.
8. The learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial as soon as possible, preferably within a period of four months.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T