Pappu Gope @ Pappu Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77213 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.

Pappu Gope @ Pappu Prasad Son of Musafir Gope @ Musaphir Prasad R/O Vill.- Kandhopeepar, P.S.- Chandi, Dist.- Nalanda. 2.

Musafir Gope @ Musaphir Prasad Son of Luxmi Gope R/O Vill.- Kandhopeepar, P.S.- Chandi, Dist.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashank Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms/Mrs. Suman Kumari Singh, A.P.P.

Mr. S.Bhatnagar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioners seek regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148 , 149, 341 , 323 , 307, 448, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, while the informant was sitting at his door, all the FIR named accused persons came there, abused him and entered the house of the informant and made indiscriminate firing, as a result of which four persons from the prosecution side sustained gunshot injuries.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, it was the present prosecution party who came variously armed and started abusing petitioner side and on protest, informant assaulted the petitioner side for which Chandi P S Case No. 48 of 2024 was instituted by these petitioners against the informant side. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77213 of 2024(4) dt.05-03-2025 2/2 further submits that the present informant was a Mukhiya candidate from one side, whereas these petitioners were the supporters of another candidate, namely Sanjay Chaudhary, and the candidate of the petitioners won, and due to that reason, the present informant was holding grudges against the family of the petitioners. There is no specific allegation against these petitioners. Charge sheet has already been filed. Petitioners are in custody since 1.5.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the State and the informant oppose the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for regular bail of the petitioners is allowed. Let these petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in Chandi Police Station Case No. 46 of 2024.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T