Md Haider v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83120 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2024 Thana- Lakho District- Begusarai ====================================================== Md Haider S/O Md. Mustafa @ Md Musthafa @ Md. Mustupha R/O VillageSinghoul(Singhaul), ward no 02, P.S- Singhoul(Singhaul), District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Asmita Bharti, Adv.
Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 109 of the B.N.S. and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that the informant was taken along with him by the petitioner Md. Haider for the purposes of cooking in a family function and when he had gone making some query with regard to the food, it is alleged that the petitioner fired a gunshot at him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First Information Report would itself disclose that there is no motive whatsoever as to why the petitioner would fire a gunshot at the person who himself took to his family function for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83120 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 preparing food. During course of investigation also, there is no material to indicate as to why such an act would be indulged into by the petitioner. Further, it has also been argued that the name of the petitioner has only been taken under some misconception as later on, the informant has filed a compromise petition before the learned court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Begusarai making a specific averment that the case was filed under some confusion and misconception and the informant is not interested in pursuing the case any further. The said compromise petition has been brought on record by way of a supplementary affidavit.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering that the parties have entered into a compromise and the informant is not interested in pursuing the case any further, let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged 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 the learned court below where the case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83120 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 pending/successor court in connection with Lakho P.S. Case No. 109 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S. (Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T