Patna High Court
Shivendra Shukla @ Shubendra ShuklaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner is the main assailant and has a prior criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Shivendra Shukla, was implicated in a shooting incident where the informant’s brother was injured, alleged to have been caused by the petitioner firing a country‑made pistol. The case is registered under Sections 109/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Shivendra sought anticipatory bail, claiming he was falsely implicated due to an old land dispute involving the MLA and police. The informant opposed bail, citing direct evidence of the shooting and the petitioner’s prior similar criminal record. The court, considering the seriousness of the allegations, the petitioner’s role as the main assailant, and his antecedent, refused anticipatory bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the alleged offences.
- Whether the allegations constitute offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- arms offence
- false implication
- land dispute
- criminal antecedent
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24445 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2024 Thana- DHANSOI District- Buxar
======================================================
Shivendra Shukla @ Shubendra Shukla S/O Sri Bihari Shukla R/O Village-
Parwat Chak, P.S- Dhansoi, Distt.- Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pathak
For the State : Mr.Shantanu Kumar
For the informant : Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel
for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out
of Dhansoi Police Station Case No. 103 of 2024, dated
02.08.2024, disclosing offences punishable under
Sections 109/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report,
is that on 01.08.2024, the informant received a phone call
that his younger brother, Md. Asgar, had been shot. Upon
such information, the informant proceeded towards the
place of occurrence and found his brother lying near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24445 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
parvatchak canal. Thereafter, the informant informed the
police and upon arrival of the police, the injured, Md.
Asgar, disclosed the name of the petitioner along with
other co-accused persons as the assailants. It is further
alleged that the petitioner fired from a country made
pistol, causing injury on the right arm above the elbow. It
is also alleged that co-accused Sudhakar Pandey was
armed with a rifle, while another co-accused, Bihari
Shukla, had caught hold the injured.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to
land dispute and the prosecution story is completely false,
fabricated and concocted. He next submits that the entire
dispute relates to an old land dispute, in which the land of
the petitioner was fraudulently sold to the informant’s
wife by the present MLA, in connivance with the police
authorities and as such, at the instance of the MLA, the
informant has falsely implicated the petitioner in the
present case. He further submits that co-accused Bihari
Shukla has been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order, dated
01.05.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. No. 23038 of 2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24445 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant
vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and
submits that there is direct allegation of firing upon the
petitioner and from perusal of injury report, it would be
evident that the bother of the informant sustained fire arm
injury over right arm. He next submits that the petitioner
has one criminal antecedent of similar nature of offence.
6. Having regards to the submission made by the parties and
taking into consideration the nature of allegation and
gravity of offence and the fact that the petitioner is main
assailant and he has got criminal antecedent also, I am not
inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory
bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
Prabhakar Anand/-
U √ T √
Checking your session…