Aman KhanversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26594 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Aman Khan Son of Naeem Khan Resident of Village- Nakardei, P.S.- Sugauli,
                 District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate
                                                   Mr. Mayank Raj, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Adarsh Prasar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Nitish Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   08-07-2026                          Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned senior

                   counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nitish Kumar, learned counsel for

                   the informant as well as Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   03.12.2025 in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 321 of

                   2024, F.I.R. dated 19.07.2024 for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 126(2), 115, 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and 27 of the Arms At.

                                3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along

                   with other accused persons with an intention to kill have

                   assaulted the husband and other family members of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26594 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
                                            2/4




          informant while they were participating in the religious

          procession.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

          present case. As per allegation in the FIR, the informant along

          with her family members and villagers have participated in the

          religious process, then the accused persons including the

          petitioner with an intention to kill, assaulted the informant's

          husband and her other family members. He further submits that

          although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he

          had fired and the same hits to the husband of the informant due

          to which he has received gunshot injury. He further submits that

          from perusal of the FIR it appears that they have no intention to

          kill anyone and on a spur of moment, the present occurrence has

          taken place. He further submits that Co-accused persons namely,

          Saifullah Khan and others have been granted anticipatory bail

          vide order dated 08.01.2025 in Cr. Misc. no. 89048 of 2024 by

          this Court and police after investigation submitted charge sheet

          against the petitioner.           The petitioner is in custody since

          03.12.2025.

                      5. The learned counsel for the informant and learned

          Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26594 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
                                            3/4




          prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that it appears from

          the FIR that there is direct and specific allegation of firing

          against the petitioner. Apart from that the petitioner carries eight

          criminal antecedents other than the present one but fairly

          submits on the basis of the supplementary affidavit filed on

          behalf of the petitioner that he is on the bail in all the pending

          matters.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of

          the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

          Magistrate-I Class, East Champaran, Motihari in connection

          with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 321 of 2024, subject to the following

          conditions:-

                       i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

          on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                       ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

          witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

          move for cancellation of bail.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26594 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
                                                        4/4




                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-

U      T