Chhotu Singh @ Abhay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1879 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Chhotu Singh @ Abhay Kumar Singh S/O Swatantra Kumar @ Tuntun Singh R/O Village- Behara, P.S.- Karakat, Dist.- Jaunpur, U.P. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2025 In compliance of the order dated 22.03.2025, the Investigating Officer concerned is personally present before the Court along with injury report as also explanation regarding the submission of the charge-sheet without the injury report.

2. Perused the show-cause (kept at Flag- 'A') submitted on behalf of the Investigating Officer. This Court is satisfied with the explanation submitted by the Investigating Officer and the same is accepted.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

4. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 326, 307, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1879 of 2025(4) dt.07-04-2025 2/3 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

5. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 24.06.2024, the petitioner and the co-accused attacked the informant at his shop, fired multiple shots, injured his cousin and robbed them of a gold chain and cash amounting to Rs. 12,000/-. The petitioner is alleged to have shot the informant on his left arm.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case due to dirty village politics. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of two days in lodging the FIR without plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2024 and has two criminal antecedents.

7. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that there is specific allegation of firing upon the informant against this petitioner and therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1879 of 2025(4) dt.07-04-2025 3/3 of the case as also there being specific allegation of firing against this petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

9. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

10. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

11. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of four months from today. If any such application is filed before the learned Court below, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

12. The personal appearance of Investigating Officer concerned is, hereby, dispensed with.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T