Amrendra Kumar @ Guddu Prasad @ Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Amrendra Kumar @ Guddu Prasad @ Guddu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023 (offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act).

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application stands allowed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Chandra Prakash Singh, J.), oral order dated 17-06-2025 in CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6510 of 2025 arising out of Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023, District East Champaran: regular bail granted to petitioner Amrendra Kumar @ Guddu Prasad @ Guddu Kumar, accused of offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, the prosecution alleging that he fired at and caused a gunshot injury to the informant's husband. Petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner was innocent, that the occurrence of 28.02.2023 was followed by an unexplained FIR delay till 02.03.2023, that the injured eyewitness Sitaram Prasad (P.W.7) neither identified the shooter nor named the petitioner, that the petitioner had no criminal antecedent, and that he had been in custody since 13.11.2024; the learned A.P.P. opposed bail, noting the specific firing allegation against the petitioner and the earlier rejection of his anticipatory bail application on 16.08.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 32805 of 2023. Considering the facts, circumstances and period of custody, the Court directed enlargement on bail on a bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each; the application stands allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6510 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2023 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran

======================================================

Amrendra Kumar @ Guddu Prasad @ Guddu Kumar S/O Prabhu Dayal Prasad R/O Village- Madhuban (Ashok Chowk), P.S- Madhuban, DistrictEast Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

ORAL ORDER

4 17-06-2025

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

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023 dated 02.03.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioner and co-accused persons surrounded her husband and started abusing him. On being protested, the petitioner caught hold of her husband and the petitioner fired on her husband due to which he sustained gunshot injury.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6510 of 2025(4) dt.17-06-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The occurrence took place on 28.02.2023 but the FIR was lodged on 02.03.2023 and there is no explanation for this delay. The injured Sitaram Prasad (P.W.7) was examined and he did not identify the person who fired causing injury in his stomach and has also not taken the name of the petitioner in the alleged offence. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 13.11.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the specific allegation of firing on the informant’s husband is against the petitioner. Earlier the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner has been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.08.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32805 of 2023.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6510 of 2025(4) dt.17-06-2025 3/3

concerned, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Madhuban P.S. Case No. 96 of 2023.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

shivam/-

U T