Patna High Court
Chhotu Singh @ Chhotu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, finding no sufficient basis to keep him in custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Chhotu Singh, was arrested in connection with a shooting incident in Ayer, Bhojpur, and charged under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1) and 109 of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleges that Lallu @ Mantosh fired the first shot that killed the informant’s father and that other persons, including Santosh Singh and Hari Govind Singh, fired subsequent shots, while the petitioner is said only to have caught the informant’s uncle. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR does not specifically allege that he discharged any weapon and that the victim’s own statement implicates Lallu as the shooter, making the charge against the petitioner untenable. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. After hearing both sides, the Court found insufficient material to justify continued detention and ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 109 of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- bail petition
- firearms offence
- Arms Act
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
- section 190
- section 191
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17806 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2025 Thana- AAYAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Chhotu Singh @ Chhotu Kumar S/O Hari Govind Singh R/O Village-
Bherari, P.S- Ayer, Distt.- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2),
191(3), 190, 103(1) and 109 of B.N.S. and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that one Lallu @
Mantosh has fired at the informant but he somehow escaped.
After this, Lallu fired another shot at the father of the informant
which hit on his chest due to which he fell down. When the
uncle of the informant Dadan Singh came to rescue then it is
alleged that Chhotu Singh (petitioner) caught him and Santosh
Singh fired at him which hit in his stomach. It is also alleged
that Hari Govind Singh has also fired at the father of the
informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17806 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has
falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the FIR itself, it is
clear that there is allegation that petitioner has caught the uncle
of the informant and there is no allegation of firing on the
petitioner. According to FIR, the first gun shot which was hit by
Lallu is said to be fired at chest of the deceased. He has also
submitted that the postmortem report goes to show that the
deceased has received only one entry and one exit wound. There
is allegation of two shots of firing. As far as the fire made by
Hari Govind Singh is concerned, it is not made clear as to where
did it hit. As such, it has been submitted that the main thrust of
allegation is against Lallu @ Mantosh. During course of
investigation, victim Dadan Singh is concerned, he has given his
statement before police and has stated that Lally @ Mantosh has
fired at him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that since the victim himself has stated that Lallu has fired, then
it becomes clear that there is no allegation of firing from the
petitioner. A statement has been made in para-4 of this petition
that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
15.09.2025. It has lastly been submitted by the learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17806 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
that similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail by this
Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 88587 of 2025 with Cr. Misc. No.
1561 of 2026.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed
the prayer of regular bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge both the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Ayer (Aayer) P.S. Case No. 73 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-VIII, Bhojpur at Ara.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…