Binod SahversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16959 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-833 Year-2024 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR District-
                                                       Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Binod Sah S/O Ramlal Sah R/O Vill- Patahi Hari, P.s-Sadar, Dist-
                 Muzaffarpur
                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                           Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                           ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr. Aditya Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Informant       :      Mr. Anunay Shahi, Advocate
                 For the State           :      Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   23-06-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel

                   for the informant and learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Sadar P.S. Case No. 833 of 2024 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 103(1), 109 and 3(5) of B.N.S. and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

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

                   petitioner has handed over the pistol to one co-accused Amar

                   Kumar. After that, he fired at Rohit Kumar and Janaki Devi. Both

                   succumbed to the injuries.

                                 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

                   that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has

                   been falsely implicated in the present case. Leaned counsel for the

                   petitioner has submitted that only role of the petitioner in this case
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16959 of 2026(4) dt.23-06-2026
                                                         2/2




                       is that is of giving the arm to the co-accused. No allegation of

                       firing is against him. He is having no criminal antecedent and he

                       is languishing in judicial custody since 31.01.2025.

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the state and learned

                       counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of

                       regular bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that

                       in this case, a report regarding stage of trial was called from the

                       learned trial Court. From perusal of report of learned trial Court, it

                       will transpire that in this case, all the prosecution witnesses have

                       been examined and the statement of the accused persons under

                       Section 351 of the B.N.S.S. has also been recorded. Even one

                       defence witness has also been adduced by the defence.

                                    6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and

                       considering the fact that as the trial is at its fag end, this court is

                       not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and, as

                       such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

                                    7. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail

                       after two months if the trial is not concluded.

                                    8. Learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial

                       within two months.


                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T