Atabul Shekh @ Rahul @ AtabulversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10728 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Atabul Shekh @ Rahul @ Atabul Son of Md. Mansoor Shekh @ Mansoor
                 Shekh Resident of Village - Vishunpur adhar, Ward No.- 7, P.S.- Kanhauli,
                 District - Sitamarhi.
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   18-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Sonbersa P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1),

                   303(2), 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms

                   Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that Vikesh

                   Das and Sushil Das were firing at the husband of the informant,

                   whereas this petitioner and Chandan Mahto assaulted with dabia.

                   The husband of the informant succumbed to the injuries.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10728 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
                                            2/3




          submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the nature of

          the allegation is general and omnibus and it is not alleged as to

          which part of the body was assaulted by the petitioner. He further

          submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it transpires

          that the doctor conducting the autopsy of the deceased has found

          the following ante mortem injuries:

                  (i) lacerated wound over occipital region of size 1 ½” x ½"

          x scalp deep;

                  (ii) lacerated wound over the left temporal region of size

          1”x ½”x scalp deep;

                  (iii) lacerated wound over the left parietal area of size 1”x

          ½”;

                  (iv) Oval-shaped lacerated wound with inverted margin and

          charred around the wound over the left-sided chest wall of size ½”

          diameter cavity deep;

                  (v) Oval-shaped lacerated wound over the back of the chest

          in the middle area, of size ½” diameter, deep cavity.

                       5. This goes to show that the deceased has received two

          gunshot injuries, as injury nos. 4 and 5 are the entry wounds, as

          the margin is inverted. He also submits that from the FIR, it is

          clear that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has

          assaulted with dabia which is a sharp cutting weapon, whereas the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10728 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     doctor has opined that in my opinion, the cause of death is due to

                     hemorrhage leading to cardiac failure as a result of the above-

                     noted injury nos. 1 and 2 by a hard and blunt object and 4 and 5

                     caused by a firearm injury. He also submits that the injuries other

                     than gunshot injuries are caused by a hard and blunt substance, as

                     per the postmortem report, whereas the allegation against the

                     petitioner is that he has assaulted with dabia. Moreover, the

                     petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.06.2025.

                                  6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of five cases.

                                  7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.          The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of

                     the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                     Magistrate, 1st Class, Sitamarhi in connection with Sonbersa P.S.

                     Case No. 146 of 2025.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T