Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nirdosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Nirdosh Kumar, was arrested in connection with an incident where two gunmen opened fire at a shop, injuring the father of a shopkeeper. The FIR alleges the petitioner committed offences under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(2), 3(5) of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, but the petitioner claims the actual firing was done by co‑accused Zafran. He has no prior criminal record and has been in judicial custody since 1 February 2026. The State opposed his bail, while the petitioner’s counsel argued the evidence points to the co‑accused and the injury was minor. After hearing both sides, the court found the allegations insufficient to deny bail and ordered the petitioner released on regular bail upon furnishing a bond with sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious charges under the Bihar Penal Code and Arms Act.
  • Whether the FIR and evidence sufficiently link the petitioner to the alleged firing.
  • Whether the nature of the injury and the petitioner’s clean record justify bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • bail application
  • Bihar Penal Code
  • Arms Act
  • no criminal antecedent
  • co‑accused
  • injury
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24790 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2026 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL District-
                                                        Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Nirdosh Kumar S/o Uday Kumar Das Resident of Village - Madanpur, P.S. -
                 Chakmehsi, District - Samastipur, At Present Punjabi Coloney, Gali No. 1,
                 Police Station - Town, District - Samastipur.

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-04-2026                     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 126(2),

                   115(2), 109(1), 118(2) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of the

                   Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant

                   has gone on the shop of one Golu. Golu and his father were

                   present there. The informant was talking with his friend,

                   meanwhile, two persons on a bike arrived and started firing.

                   One of them was apprehended and he was identified as the

                   petitioner. This petitioner has disclosed that one co-accused

                   Zafran has made firing.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24790 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                                   4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                      petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                      counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the

                      FIR itself, it is clear that the allegation of firing is on co-accused

                      Zafran. Learned counsel has submitted that in any view of the

                      matter, the nature of injury is simple and the gun shot has hit in

                      elbow of the father of Golu. Moreover, the petitioner is

                      languishing in judicial custody since 01.02.2026 having no

                      criminal antecedent.

                                   5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

                      vehemently 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 the petitioner on bail. The above named

                      petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with

                      Muffasil P.S. Case No. 50 of 2026 on furnishing bail bond of

                      Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM-IInd, Samastipur.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.