IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23317 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- Chakki District- Buxar ====================================================== 1. Munna Singh Son of Lalan Singh vill - Chakki ps - chakki, Dist- Buxar 2. Tarkeshwar Singh son of Late Shiv Pujan Singh vill - Chakki ps - chakki, Dist- Buxar 3. Sugan Singh @ Prahlad Singh son of Prabhu Singh @ Ram Kumar Singh vill - Chakki ps - chakki, Dist- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Ms.Dimpal Kumari, Adv. Ms.Diksha Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh For the Informant : Mr.Parijat Saurav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 4 06-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP for the State. 2. In this case, the petitioners are seeking regular bail in connection with Chakki P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 for the offences under section 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 118(1), 125, 126(2), 352, 351(2), (3) of B.N.S. and 27 of Arms Act. 3. According to the FIR, when the informant went to visit his field, 17 accused persons named in the FIR assaulted him with lathi, etc. On his shouting, his uncle, father, and brother came there. The allegation against petitioner no. 3 is that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23317 of 2025(4) dt.06-08-2025 2/3 he fired at Kamlesh Singh and made him injured. Co-accused Pradeep Singh fired at the person of Arjun Singh and petitioner no. 1 fired at Mukesh Singh. The allegation against petitioner no. 2 is that he fired at Satyanarayan Singh. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. They have remained under custody for near about 6 months, and the injuries are simple in nature. He has also submitted that there is case and counter case, and some arms and ammunition were recovered from the house of the members of prosecution side. It has further been submitted that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 were acquitted in a case lodged against them earlier, so it cannot be considered as criminal antecedent against them. So far as petitioner no. 3 is concerned, he has also been acquitted in one of the cases, lodged against him. 5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the injuries suffered by the injured persons are though simple in nature but it was caused by firearms. 6. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances as well as period of incarceration, the bail Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23317 of 2025(4) dt.06-08-2025 3/3 petition of the petitioners is disposed of with the observation that the learned court below may consider the bail application of the petitioners after framing of the charges. Kundan/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U T